Arizona Republican Party Election Audit PRELIMINARY REPORT Stephen Richer January 25, 2019 On the evening of Tuesday, November 6, 2018 Arizona voters went to bed believing that Republicans had won all three close statewide races: U.S. Senate, Secretary of State, and Superintendent of Education. The highly-respected Associated Press declared victory for Republican Steve Gaynor at 10:20 pm1 and assured Gaynor that it almost never miscalled a race.2 But the Associated Press was somehow wrong. Not only did Gaynor’s election night lead evaporate in the following days, but so too did the leads of Republicans Martha McSally and Frank Riggs. Within a week, McSally’s election night lead of nearly 15,000 votes3 turned into a deficit of 55,900 votes;4 Gaynor went from a lead of over 40,000 votes5 to trailing by 20,252 votes;6 and Riggs’s apparent victory by a margin of approximately 7,000 votes7 turned into a loss by 71,676 votes.8 These reversals of fortune in three statewide elections left many Arizona voters confused and upset, especially Arizona Republicans who felt as though they’d had the rug pulled out from under them. Those voters voiced their concerns to Arizona Republican Party Chairman Jonathan Lines who responded by launching this Review on November 15, 2018. Chairman Lines asked that this Review pay particular attention to the procedures in Maricopa County -- home to more than 60 percent of Arizona’s voters in the most recent election.9 Elections in Maricopa County are overseen by the Maricopa County Recorder’s Office. In the past year, that Office has already been the subject of at least three reviews, audits, or Dustin Gardiner, Arizona Republic, ​Steve Gaynor, Katie Hobbs in tight race for Arizona secretary of state ​(Nov. 6, 2018), ​available at https://www.azcentral.com/story/news/politics/elections/2018/11/06/arizona-secretary-state-election-result s-steve-gaynor-katie-hobbs/1809258002/​. 2 Interview with Steve Gaynor, January 3, 2019; ​see also ​Car​men ​Forman​, ​Arizona Capitol Times​, AP: Steve Gaynor Arizona’s next Secretary of State​ (Nov. 6, 2018),​ available at https://azcapitoltimes.com/news/2018/11/06/arizona-katie-hobbs-steve-gaynor-secretary-of-states-race-is -close-as-election-results-pour-in/​ (“In his brief victory speech, Gaynor conceded that many ballots had not yet been counted. But the AP is rarely wrong, he said.”). 3 Joseph Flaherty, Phoenix New Times, ​Martha McSally Has Tight Lead With Arizona Senate Race Too Close to Call (​ Nov. 6, 2018), ​available at https://www.phoenixnewtimes.com/news/us-senate-contest-in-arizona-still-too-close-to-call-11004820​. 4 Arizona Secretary of State’s Office, ​State of Arizona Official Canvass 2018 General Election - Nov. 06, 2018 ​(Nov. 30, 2018) (the “Official Canvass”), ​available at https://azsos.gov/sites/default/files/2018%201203%20Signed%20Official%20Statewide%20Canvass.pdf​. 5 Shane Dale, ABC15, ​Arizona Secretary of State: Katie Hobbs, Steve Gaynor are neck and neck​ (Nov. 6, 2018), ​available at​: https://www.abc15.com/news/state/steve-gaynor-defeats-katie-hobbs-in-arizona-secretary-of-state-race​. 6 Official Canvass. 7 ABC 15 Arizona,​ Arizona Election 2018: 2 races with results too close to call​ (Nov. 7, 2018), ​available at https://www.abc15.com/news/state/arizona-election-2018-3-races-with-results-too-close-to-call​. 8 Official Canvass. 9 ​Official Canvass​ ​(1,454,103 ballots cast in Maricopa County of 2,409,910 statewide in November 2018 general election). 1 1 investigations. Those reviews focused on the primary election on August 28, 2018, in which 62 of the 503 voting locations failed to open on time,10 delays that affected up to 270,000 voters11 and caused “many” voters to turn away from their polling places.12 The Maricopa County Internal Audit Department released an interim report on September 21, 2018 detailing the failings of the primary;13 the consulting and audit firm Berry Dunn produced a report on November 2, 2018 that covered the attempts by the Recorder’s Office to improve its operations in time for the general election;14 ​The Arizona Republic​, and other local publications,​ ​wrote many detailed articles regarding the failures of the primary;15 and the Maricopa County Board of Supervisors recently voted unanimously to allocate $50,000 to a working group charged with reviewing and improving the County’s election practices.16 Maricopa County Internal Audit Department, ​Interim Report ​(Sept. 21, 2018), ​available at https://www.maricopa.gov/DocumentCenter/View/41436/Interim-Report---Final​ and attached as Exhibit A. 11 ​Pamela Ren Larson, Arizona Republic, ​Maricopa County voting delays affected 1 in 8 precincts, up to 270,000 voters​ (Aug. 31, 2018), ​available at https://www.azcentral.com/story/news/politics/arizona/2018/08/31/maricopa-county-recorder-voting-issues -polling-place-machines-malfunction-fontes-arizona-primary/1150414002/​. 12 ABC 15 Arizona, ​Arizona primary election: Voters report Valley polling place issues​ (Aug. 29, 2018), available at https://www.abc15.com/news/region-phoenix-metro/central-phoenix/voters-reporting-polling-issues-in-thevalley​. 13 Maricopa County Internal Audit Department, ​Interim Report ​(Sept. 21, 2018), ​available at https://www.maricopa.gov/DocumentCenter/View/41436/Interim-Report---Final​ and attached as Exhibit A. 14 Berry Dunn, ​Maricopa County Recorder’s Office – Election Day Processes and Related Issues, Report of Observations and Recommendations​ (Nov. 2, 2018), ​available at https://www.maricopa.gov/DocumentCenter/View/42446/Maricopa-County-Election-Processes-Report-20 18-11-02​ and attached as Exhibit B. 15 ​See, e.g., ​Jessica Boehm,​ Dustin Ga​rdiner, et al., Arizona Republic, ​Who is to blame for Maricopa County's election day problems?​ (Aug. 28, 2018), ​available at https://www.azcentral.com/story/news/politics/elections/2018/08/28/election-day-voting-secretary-state-cal ls-extended-poll-hours-voting-locations/1124910002/​; Jessica Boehm and Jen Fifield, Arizona Republic, Who is to blame for Maricopa County's election day problems?​ (Nov. 1, 2018), ​available at https://www.azcentral.com/story/news/politics/elections/2018/11/01/after-rocky-primary-can-adrian-fontespull-off-november-general-election-voters-polls-vote-centers/1449331002/​; Jessica Boehm, Arizona Republic, ​Maricopa County audit blames Adrian Fontes for some election day problems ​(Sept. 21, 2018), available at https://www.azcentral.com/story/news/politics/elections/2018/09/21/maricopa-county-audit-blames-record er-adrian-fontes-some-election-day-problems/1382555002/​; Elvia Diaz, Arizona Republic, ​An extra hour of voting won't fix Maricopa County's repeated election glitches​ (Aug. 28, 2018), ​available at https://www.azcentral.com/story/opinion/op-ed/elviadiaz/2018/08/28/arizona-primary-voting-problems-bla me-adrian-fontes-another-mistake/1126116002/​; Jessica Boehm, Arizona Republic, Maricopa County Recorder Adrian Fontes releases report he said he wouldn't ​(Sept. 21, 2018), ​available at https://www.azcentral.com/story/news/politics/elections/2018/09/21/maricopa-county-recorder-adrian-font es-releases-report-he-said-he-wouldnt-release/1384284002/​. 16 Jessica Boehm, Arizona Republic, ​Maricopa County eyes election changes after chaotic 2018 elections (Jan 16, 2019), ​available at https://www.azcentral.com/story/news/politics/elections/2019/01/16/maricopa-county-supervisors-eye-pho 10 2 This Review focuses on the Recorder’s Office in the November general election and the questions most frequently posed by voters to Chairman Jonathan Lines and the Arizona Republican Party. To date, the Review has investigated and assessed: (1) the Office’s decision to open special emergency voting centers, (2) the Office’s decision to rehabilitate ballots following election night, (3) allegations of partisan behavior by County Recorder Adrian Fontes, and (4) particularized allegations of voter fraud or irregularities in Maricopa County. This Review is ​preliminary​. The Recorder’s Office has not yet responded to public records requests made on November 10, 2018,17 December 17, 2018,18 and January 1, 201919 for the purposes of this Review. Nor has the Recorder’s Office responded to requests for interviews and questions regarding the decisions made by the Recorder’s Office.20 Without these documents and interviews, this Review can make only speculative conclusions. Additionally, a future, complete report should examine the two hour-plus wait times at certain polling locations,21 the delay in the tabulation process following Election Day,22 the security protocols for delivering votes from individual polling places to a central location, a midday software failure that caused all voting machines to go temporarily offline,23 reports of ballot harvesting, and allegations that Maricopa County does not comply with ARS § 16-668 by syncing its voter database with the database maintained by the Secretary of State’s Office.24 enix-area-election-changes-after-chaotic-2018-adrian-fontes/2587021002/?fbclid=IwAR0KJ3qLEqjKUM0h d3M_kmrH3bN5mvL_X37JAs2llOidt-js1_jP_p3QG-E​. 17 Attached as Exhibit C. 18 Attached as Exhibit D. 19 Attached as Exhibit E. 20 Attached as Exhibit F. 21 Rachel Leingang, Jessica Boehm, and Derek Hall, Arizona Republic, ​ASU voters reported wait times of 2 hours or more. Is a new polling site needed for 2020? ​(Nov. 7, 2018), ​available at https://www.azcentral.com/story/news/politics/elections/2018/11/07/arizona-midterm-elections-why-were-li nes-vote-asu-state-university-so-long-campus-student-turnout/1921801002/​. 22 In the ​2017 Maricopa County Recorder’s Office Annual Report​, Recorder Fontes stated that his Office “can have all ballots counted and unofficial election results reported-out ​within 72 hours of polls closing on Election Day.​” ​Maricopa County Recorder’s Office Annual Report 2017​, at page 19 (emphasis added), ​available at​ ​https://recorder.maricopa.gov/pdf/MyPdfDownload.pdf​. 23 Alden Woods, Robert Anglen, and Jessica Boehm, Arizona Republic, ​Election Day issues: Foreclosure, technology glitches, running out of ballots​ (Nov. 6, 2018), ​available at https://www.azcentral.com/story/news/politics/elections/2018/11/06/arizona-voting-problems-election-dayreport-issues-adrian-fontes-maricopa-county-midterms/1808914002/​. 24 Maricopa County maintains its own voter registration database that some observers have alleged is insufficiently “synced” with the database maintained by the Secretary of State’s Office (as required by federal law). The Recorder’s Office stated that “After witnessing the Secretary of State stumble … the Recorder does not believe that turning over management of the voter registration database to the Secretary of State is in the best interest of the county.” Page 24 of ​2017 Maricopa County Recorder’s Office Annual Report 2017​, at page 24, ​available at https://recorder.maricopa.gov/pdf/MyPdfDownload.pdf​. 3 1. Emergency Voting Centers Title 16 of the Arizona Revised Statutes (“ARS”) and the 2014 State of Arizona Elections Procedures Manual allow counties to accept emergency ballots during the weekend and the Monday before the Tuesday Election Day. ARS section 16-542 defines “emergency” as “any unforeseen circumstances that would prevent the elector from voting at the polls.”25 Page 58 of the Elections Procedures Manual offers only slightly more detail: “Emergency” means any unforeseen circumstances that would prevent the elector from voting at the polls. Electors who encounter an emergency occurring ​between​: ● 5:00 p.m. on the second Friday before the election and ● 5:00 p.m. on the Monday before the election may request to vote in the manner prescribed by the County Recorder of their respective county.26 Arizona counties -- including Maricopa County -- have long allowed voters to cast ballots in such an emergency manner. However, the manner in which Recorder Fontes allowed for emergency voting in the November election deviated significantly from the practices of the Recorder’s Office under Recorder Helen Purcell. 1A. Decision to Expand Emergency Voting The Recorder’s Office opened the following five emergency voting locations on Saturday, November 3 and Monday, November 5 from 8:00 AM until 5:00 PM: ● ● ● ● ● Avondale City Hall (11465 W. Civic Dr., Avondale) Indian Bend Wash Visitor Center (4201 N. Hayden Rd., Scottsdale) MCTEC - Elections Department (510 S. 3rd Ave., Phoenix) Mesa Recorder’s Office (222 E. Javelina, Mesa) Tolleson Park & Recreation Center (9555 W. Van Buren St., Tolleson)27 25 A.R.S. § 16-542(H). Arizona Secretary of State’s Office, ​State of Arizona Election Procedures Manual (Rev. 2014)​ (the “2014 Election Procedures Manual”), ​available at https://azsos.gov/sites/default/files/election_procedure_manual_2014.pdf​. 27 Adrian Fontes (@RecorderFontes). (Nov. 3, 2018). Tweet, ​available at https://twitter.com/RecorderFontes/status/1058765073764691968​. 26 4 Recorder Fontes advertised these locations on his personal Twitter feed, his Recorder’s Twitter feed,28 and through the official media outlets of the Recorder’s Office.29 This practice deviated significantly from the practices of the previous recorder, Helen Purcell. Under Purcell, the Recorder’s Office did not advertise the availability of emergency voting, and it did not open additional locations outside of the Recorder’s Office.30 Instead, emergency voting under Purcell was limited to voters who sought out the option and drove to the Recorder’s Office, or people who contacted the Recorder’s Office from, for example, a hospital, in which case Purcell would dispatch an officer to collect the person’s ballot.31 Many observers have questioned the motivation behind Recorder Fontes’s decision to expand the number of emergency voting locations and to advertise their availability. Some observers have pointed to Recorder Fontes’s advocacy for Arizona House Bill 220632 and Arizona Senate Bill 146633 during the 2018 legislative session. Those bills sought, among other things, to expand early voting to “the three-day period immediately preceding election day.”34 In other words, the bills sought to expand early voting to the period covered by emergency voting. Recorder Fontes voiced strong support for certain provisions in the bills, including the expansion of early voting to include the weekend prior to Election Day. In an email to members of the Arizona House, dated April 19, 2018, Recorder Fontes wrote, “[t]he Mesnard Floor Amendment also removes an important provision of SB 1466, which allows Counties to approve weekend voting immediately prior to Election Day. This makes voting more convenient and reduces the possibility of long lines on Election Day.”35 On the same day, Recorder Fontes released a video in which he criticized the “people who killed weekend voting,” saying that weekend voting is “a really good thing for Arizona.” He then encouraged voters to contact their representatives in the Arizona legislature to support weekend voting.36 With this as a backdrop, it seems plausible that Recorder Fontes expanded emergency voting to partially accomplish what the Arizona legislature considered but refused to authorize: expanding early voting to the Saturday, Sunday, and Monday before the Tuesday election. Such Adrian Fontes (@RecorderFontes). (Nov. 5, 2018). Tweet, ​available at https://twitter.com/Adrian_Fontes/status/1059372209200750592​. 29 Maricopa County Recorder’s Office,​ PRESS RELEASE: Emergency Voting Available before Election Day​ (Nov. 2, 2018), ​available at ​https://content.govdelivery.com/accounts/AZMARIC/bulletins/218d12d​. 30 Interview of Helen Purcell, December 21, 2018. 31 Interview of Helen Purcell, December 21, 2018. 32 Arizona H.B. 2206 (2018), ​available at ​https://legiscan.com/AZ/text/HB2206/id/1685189​. 33 Arizona S.B. 1466 (2018), ​available at ​https://legiscan.com/AZ/text/SB1466/id/1708659​. 34 Arizona H.B. 2206 (2018) (proposed addition to A.R.S. § 16-542(A). 35 Email from Adrian fontes dated April 19, 2018. Included in public records received from Arizona Senate, attached as Exhibit G. 36 Adrian Fontes (@RecorderFontes). (April 19, 2018). Tweet, ​available at https://twitter.com/RecorderFontes/status/987090258939359232​. 28 5 a “back door” to a legislative proposal would almost certainly violate the intent of emergency voting as defined in the Arizona code and in the Elections Procedure Manual (which perhaps is why Recorder Fontes first sought to use legislative channels). Recorder Fontes has stated that he opened additional emergency voting locations at the request of Maricopa County Supervisor Steve Gallardo, the Board of Supervisors’ lone Democrat.37 Recorder Fontes did not ask for the input of other members of the Board regarding the decision to expand emergency voting.38 The Recorder’s Office has not responded to the public records requests made pursuant to this Review regarding the Recorder’s decision to expand emergency voting locations, nor did the Recorder respond to the Review’s request to interview him on this topic. This Review preliminarily concludes that it is plausible that Recorder Fontes expanded emergency voting -- in a manner inconsistent with the intent of state statutes -- to achieve what the legislature considered but refused to authorize: expanding early voting to the Saturday, Sunday, and Monday before Election Day Tuesday. 1B. Location of the Emergency Voting Centers As noted above, Recorder Fontes chose to expand emergency voting to the following five locations: ● ● ● ● ● Avondale City Hall (11465 W. Civic Dr., Avondale) Indian Bend Wash Visitor Center (4201 N. Hayden Rd., Scottsdale) MCTEC - Elections Department (510 S. 3rd Ave., Phoenix) Mesa Recorder’s Office (222 E. Javelina, Mesa) Tolleson Park & Recreation Center (9555 W. Van Buren St., Tolleson)39 The rationale behind the choice of these locations is unknown. The Recorder’s Office has not yet responded to the public document requests made on November 10 and December 17, 2018 regarding this topic. Nor has Recorder Fontes responded to this Review’s interview request on this topic. Jeremy Duda, AZ Mirror, ​Republicans question Fontes decisions on emergency voting centers​ (Nov. 15, 2018), ​available at https://www.azmirror.com/2018/11/15/republicans-question-fontes-decisions-on-emergency-voting-center s/​ (“Fontes said he opened the center at the request of Steve Gallardo, the Board of Supervisors’ lone Democratic member, and Anna Tovar, the Democratic mayor of Tolleson.”). 38 Communication with office County Supervisor Steve Chucri. 39 Adrian Fontes (@RecorderFontes). (Nov. 3, 2018). Tweet, ​available at https://twitter.com/RecorderFontes/status/1058765073764691968​. 37 6 Recorder Fontes has publicly stated that he opened the Tolleson location at the request of Supervisor Gallardo and Tolleson Mayor Anna Tovar.40 The Recorder has also stated that, “If it was up to me and I had enough people available, we would’ve had all 40 of the vote centers open all weekend long.”41 What is known about the locations of the emergency voting locations is the partisan makeup of the five encompassing precincts:42 ● Avondale City Hall is in precinct 282. There, Republicans make up 16.39% of the registered voters and Democrats make up 42.29%. The Avondale City Hall location is in Legislative District 19, which is represented by two Democrats in the Arizona House of Representatives (Diego Espinoza and Lorenzo Sierra) and by Democratic Arizona state senator Lupe Contreras. ● The Indian Bend Wash precinct consists of 31.82% registered Republicans and 32.77% registered Democrats. It is in Legislative District 23, which is represented by three Republicans in the state legislature (John Kavanagh, Jay Lawrence, and Michelle Ugenti-Rita). ● The voting registration of the MCTEC Elections Department precinct is 13.27% Republican and 49.66% Democrat; MCTEC is located in Legislative District 27 which is represented by three Democrats (Reginald Bolding, Jr., Diego Rodriguez, andRebecca Rios) ● The Mesa Recorder’s Office is located in precinct 381, which is 21.85% Republican and 36.42% Democrat. The Legislative District, 26, is represented by three Democrats (Isela Blanc, Athena Salman, and Juan Mendez). ● The Tolleson location is in precinct 670 and is 11.40% registered Republican and 54.67% registered Democrat voters. Legislative District 19 is represented by three Democrats (Diego Espinoza, Lorenzo Sierra, and Lupe Contreras). All five locations are in precincts with more registered Democrats than Republicans; four of the five overwhelmingly favor Democrats. Given the partisan imbalance of these locations, Jeremy Duda, AZ Mirror, ​Ugenti-Rita seeks new limits on early voting​ (Jan. 17, 2019),​ available at https://www.azmirror.com/2019/01/17/ugenti-rita-seeks-new-limits-on-early-voting/​. 41 Jeremy Duda, AZ Mirror,​ ​Republicans question Fontes decisions on emergency voting centers​ (Nov. 15, 2018), ​available at https://www.azmirror.com/2018/11/15/republicans-question-fontes-decisions-on-emergency-voting-center s/​. 42 Data compiled by Merissa Hamilton, last visited Jan. 21, 2018, ​available at https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1mAAOhwET4GJW6RY6kBtuMPaG99muiiPnYUKbNIif3Gs/edit# gid=0​. 40 7 and given that the Recorder’s Office has not produced any documents or interview responses that offer a non-partisan reason for selecting the locations of the emergency voting centers, this Review preliminarily concludes that it is plausible that Recorder Fontes located these emergency voting centers in a partisan manner. 1C. Emergency Nature of the Emergency Voting Centers Section 16-542(H) of the Arizona Revised Statutes defines “emergency” as “any unforeseen circumstances that would prevent the elector from voting at the polls.” No case law exists that provides considerable additional detail to this definition. Arizona Recorders from other, non-Maricopa counties have interpreted this statute to require different things of emergency voters. Pima County noted clearly on its website that voting in the three days before Election Day was meant for voters with emergencies only. Pima County also placed physical signs to this effect at the emergency voting locations, and employees of the Recorder’s Office were trained to ask voters if they were there for emergency voting purposes.43 The Recorder’s Office of Yavapai County was not open during the weekend before Election Day. However, the Yavapai County Recorder’s Office sent bipartisan teams to voters in places like hospitals to people who had emergency incidents and could not vote on Election Day.44 During Helen Purcell’s time as Recorder of Maricopa County, the County required emergency voters to sign an affidavit attesting to their emergency. According to Purcell, she even turned away U.S. Representative J.D. Hayworth when he tried to emergency vote on the weekend before Election Day owing to his need to be in Washington D.C. for Congressional duties on Election Day. Purcell told him that he easily could have foreseen this scheduling conflict and voted according to early voting procedures and that his reasoning did not constitute an emergency.45 Purcell cited instances in which her Office allowed first responders to emergency vote before being deployed as examples of emergencies.46 Neither the Maricopa County Recorder’s Office nor Recorder Fontes has responded to the public record requests and interview requests made pursuant to this Review on the topic of how the Recorder’s Office ensured that the voting on Saturday, November 3 and Monday, November 5 was limited to voters with emergencies. However, the Recorder did make multiple public statements regarding the purpose of the emergency voting centers and his obligation to verify the voter’s emergency: 43 Interview with Recorder F. Ann Rodriguez, December 17, 2018. Interview with Recorder Leslie M. Hoffman, December 30, 2018. 45 Interview with Helen Purcell, December 21, 2018. 46 Interview with Helen Purcell, December 21, 2018. 44 8 ● “The intent of the [emergency voting] law is to make sure people who want to vote can vote. All I’m trying to do is let people vote.”47 ● “It’s not my business what your emergency is . . . I’ve got HIPPA laws that prevent me from asking. You’ve got your privacy that I have to respect”48 ● “Still need to vote, but know you won’t be able to make it to the polls on Election Day? You can vote either Saturday and Monday at our Emergency Vote Centers.”49 ● “Voters can decide if their situation qualifies as an emergency.” (This tweet has since been deleted, but a screenshot image is included in this Review).50 As a result of Recorder Fontes’s comments, ​The Arizona Republic ​wrote in an article titled “Early voting locations: Vote Monday if you can’t make it on Election Day” that “[t]hough the vote centers are dubbed ‘emergency,’ the Maricopa County Recorder’s Office doesn’t define emergency and will serve anyone who shows up and is registered to vote.”51 Another article for The Arizona Republic ​observed that “Phoenix resident Taiwah Vincent voted at the Maricopa County Tabulation and Elections Department in downtown Phoenix. She had already been downtown running errands, so it was convenient to drop by and vote.”52 And a ​12 News​ headline read: “Busy on Election Day? You can vote today at these emergency polling locations.”53 The resulting impression that emergency voting centers were open to voters possibly unavailable on Election Day, but requiring no further proof or testimony of an emergency, is a significant departure from emergency voting process under Recorder Purcell. Additionally, it could be convincingly argued that this is an inappropriate departure from the meaning of emergency as codified in Arizona statutes and as intended by the enacting legislature. However, the statute defining emergency is broad, and neither the statute nor the 2014 Elections Todd Shepherd, The Free Beacon, ​Maricopa Board Expressed Concern to Fontes Over ‘Emergency Voting’ Centers ​(Nov. 12, 2018), ​available at https://freebeacon.com/politics/maricopa-board-expressed-concern-fontes-emergency-voting-centers/​. 48 ​Id. 49 Adrian Fontes (@RecorderFontes). (Nov. 3, 2018). Tweet, ​available at https://twitter.com/RecorderFontes/status/1058765073764691968​. 50 Adrian Fontes (@RecorderFontes). (Oct. 30, 2018). Tweet, attached as Exhibit H. 51 Jessica Boehm, Arizona Republic, ​Early voting locations: Vote Monday if you can't make it on Election Day​ (Nov. 2, 2018), ​available at https://www.azcentral.com/story/news/politics/elections/2018/11/02/arizona-elections-early-voting-location s-vote-saturday-monday-maricopa-county/1863047002/​. 52 Bree Burkitt, Arizona Republic, ​Arizonans head to early-voting locations ahead of Election Day​ (Nov. 3, 2018), ​available at https://www.azcentral.com/story/news/politics/elections/2018/11/03/arizona-voters-head-early-voting-locat ions-ahead-election-day/1878664002/​. 53 Jen Wahl, 12 News Arizona, ​Busy on Election Day? You can vote today at these emergency polling locations ​(Nov. 5, 2018), ​available at https://www.12news.com/article/news/politics/elections/busy-on-election-day-you-can-vote-today-at-these -emergency-polling-locations/75-5cedc865-296e-4606-a97c-33531365edb5​. 47 9 Procedures Manual requires that Recorders take specific steps to ascertain the voter’s emergency. 1D. Coordination with Sinema Campaign The most serious allegation regarding the Recorder’s Office and the emergency voting center is the allegation that the Recorder’s Office coordinated the location and timing of the centers with the Kyrsten Sinema campaign for U.S. Senate. According to multiple people involved with campaigns in the November election, and public statements made from elected officials such as Republican John Kavanagh,54 the Sinema campaign arranged for a flyer-drop in the areas surrounding the emergency voting centers immediately prior to the opening of the centers.55 Such a flyer-drop could suggest that the Sinema campaign knew about the location of the emergency voting centers prior to their public announcement. A former staff member of the Martha McSally campaign did not comment on the allegation that the Recorder’s Office coordinated with the Sinema campaign, but did note that the McSally campaign was unaware of the expansion of emergency voting prior to the Recorder’s public announcement.56 This Review has made multiple public records requests relating to the allegation of coordination between the Recorder’s Office and the Sinema campaign or affiliates of the Sinema campaign, and has sought interviews with the Recorder’s Office to this end. At this preliminary point, this Review has no evidence to disprove or confirm the allegations regarding coordination between the Recorder Fontes and the Sinema campaign. 1E. The Effects of Emergency Voting and Policy Preferences The Arizona Capitol Times​, through its publication ​The Yellow Sheet Report​, reported on November 19, 2018, that 2,788 votes had been cast at the emergency voting centers. As stated by the author of that publication, the margin of victory in the U.S. Senate race, the Secretary of State race, and the Superintendent race each exceeded the total number of votes cast at emergency voting centers. It is therefore almost certainly accurate to say that the presence of emergency voting centers did not change the results of any of those three elections.57 However, the eventual impact of the emergency voting centers on the election has no bearing on the ​Yellow Sheet Report​, November 21, 2018 (“About the President’s Tweet”). Based on multiple conversations with voters and with campaign staff. Also reported in places such as the November 14, 2018 ​Yellow Sheet Report ​(“My Dog At My Ballot?”). 56 Interview with McSally campaign staff member, December 20, 2018. 57 Unless the number of votes counted at the emergency voting centers was misreported or the presence of the emergency voting centers somehow galvanized more Democrats to vote on Election Day, but the latter scenario especially seems highly unlikely. 54 55 10 appropriateness, lawfulness, or possible partisan motivation of their authorization and implementation.58 For example, Laurie Roberts argued in ​The Arizona Republic ​that the emergency voting centers were a positive tool that potentially allowed more people to vote. That may or may not be so, but their public policy merit plays no factor in this Review. ​See ​Laurie Roberts, Arizona Republic, ​Why is the Arizona Republican Party in a tizzy over 2,788 voters?​ (Nov. 26, 2018), ​available at https://www.azcentral.com/story/opinion/op-ed/laurieroberts/2018/11/26/arizona-republican-party-emerge ncy-voting-centers/2120353002/​. 58 11 2. Rehabilitation of Ballots Another issue that drew considerable attention was the Recorder’s decision to continue rehabilitating ballots after election night. Arizona law allows for early voting by mail, an option already utilized by a significant majority of Arizona voters, and one that is increasingly popular. According to Recorder Fontes, 81.44% of Maricopa County voters took advantage of some form of early voting in the November 2018 election.59 Those voting by mail in the recent election had until October 31 to postmark their ballots.60 If they missed that deadline, they could drop off their mail-in ballots at the in-person voting locations on Election Day, so long as those ballots were received by 7:00 p.m. on Election Day.61 Once “late early ballots” are received, the signature on the green envelope enclosing the ballot is compared with the voter’s signature on file in order to confirm the voter’s identity.62 This is done because early ballots do not require the voter to present identification.63 In the event that the signature on the green envelope does not match the signature on file, the Recorder’s Office will attempt to “cure” or “rehabilitate” the ballot by contacting the voter and verifying his or her identity.64 The Recorder’s Office reported receiving 168,000 late-early ballots on Election Day.65 Prior to Recorder Fontes’s time in office, Maricopa County stopped the curing/rehabilitation process at 7:00 pm on Election Night. This had the potential effect of excluding some late early ballots from being counted because if those ballots had mismatched signatures, the Recorder’s Office might not have had enough time to cure the ballot received on Election Day prior to 7:00 p.m. that same day. According to Recorder Purcell, early voting is intended to in fact be ​early​; voters have multiple weeks prior to the election to mail in their ballots. If voters choose to wait until Election Day to drop off the “early ballot” then the burden is on them to make sure their signature matches the signature on file.66 Recorder Fontes departed from Recorder Purcell’s tradition and instead chose to continue rehabilitating ballots after Election Day. This prompted a lawsuit from the Arizona Republican Party.67 The Republican Party claimed that “[p]rinciples of equal protection cannot abide the Adrian Fontes (@RecorderFontes). (Nov. 25, 2018). Tweet, ​available at https://twitter.com/Adrian_Fontes/status/1066853780916858880​. 60 Adrian Fontes (@RecorderFontes). (Oct. 31, 2018). Tweet, ​available at https://twitter.com/RecorderFontes/status/1057693528535396352​. 61 A.R.S. § 16-551(C). 62 A.R.S. § 16-550(A). 63 A.R.S. § 16-579(A)(1). 64 2014 Arizona Election Procedures Manual at 166. 65 ​Yellow Sheet Report​, November 26, 2018 (“Fontes Stole The Election With 6,933 Cured Ballots”). 66 Interview with Helen Purcell, December 21, 2018. 67 Bob Christie and Nicholas Riccardi, Fox 10, ​Arizona GOP sues to limit mail-in ballots in US Senate race (Nov. 8, 2018), ​available at 59 12 County Recorder Defendants’ fashioning of ​ad hoc ​deadlines and variegated procedures for the disposition of facially deficient early ballots.”68 In other words, the Republican Party objected that votes continued to be cured in some counties -- such as Maricopa County -- while that process ended at 7:00 p.m. on Election Day in other counties. In doing so, the Party argued, the voting system treated votes unequally. County Recorders are provided with limited direction regarding the curing of ballots under Section 16-550(A) of the Arizona Code and the 2014 Elections Procedures Manual. Page 166 of the Elections Procedures Manual states that “the County Recorder, if time permits, may attempt to contact the voter to ascertain whether the voter actually voted the early ballot and any reasons why the signatures may not match.”69 The language “if time permits” is vague and does not clearly mark a definite stop time for the curing process. While a departure from the practices of Recorder Purcell, Recorder Fontes’s decision to continue rehabilitating ballots after Election Day is not unique among county recorders. As noted by the Republican Party in the litigation addressing this issue, Coconino, Apache, Pinal, and Pima counties all continued rehabilitation for some period of time after Election Day.70 One current county recorder remarked that the county recorders gathered prior to the November election to discuss the process of curing. That particular county recorder believed that the recorders had together reached an agreement to end curing at 7:00 p.m. on Election Night, but acknowledges that they did not receive the guidance or direction that some recorders sought regarding the issue from Secretary of State Michelle Reagan.71 When asked by reporters from the ​Arizona Capitol Times ​if he had conducted a legal analysis regarding his decision to continue curing ballots, Recorder Fontes declared that such information was privileged.72 This Review has asked for -- but not received -- similar documents regarding the Recorder’s motivations for changing the process and his legal justification for doing so. Nonetheless, in continuing the curing process past Election Day, Recorder Fontes did not violate any statutory provision or the 2014 Elections Procedures Manual. Moreover, this decision eventually became moot as a result of the settlement agreement in the Arizona http://www.fox10phoenix.com/news/arizona-news/arizona-early-voting-could-delay-senate-outcome-to-ne xt-week_​. 68 Republican Party Pre-Hearing Memorandum of Plaintiffs-Intervenors Arizona Republican Party and Public Integrity Alliance, attached as Exhibit I, at 6. 69 2014 Elections Procedures Manual at 166. 70 Republican Party Pre-Hearing Memorandum of Plaintiffs-Intervenors Arizona Republican Party and Public Integrity Alliance, attached as Exhibit I, at 4. 71 Interview with county recorder. 72 ​Yellow Sheet Report​, November 8, 2018 (“If You Can’t Handle Questions, Stick To Facebook Live”). 13 Republican Party lawsuit, which standardized the curing process across counties.73 That settlement, however, does not standardize the curing process across counties for future elections. Multiple recorders commented in interviews taken pursuant to this Review that the curing process could benefit from statutory clarification or from guidance from the Secretary of State’s Office.74 Additionally, as currently read, A.R.S. § 16-552(E) seems incompatible with an extended curing process. That section requires that early voting challenges must be completed no later than 5:00 p.m. on the Monday following Election Day, and it also requires that a period of notice be given to a voter with a challenged ballot. It must also be noted that any curing decision likely had only a minimal impact on the election. The ​Arizona Capitol Times​ reported that of the “mail-in ballots that were counted after election day, 7,240 were flagged with questionable signatures, and the recorder’s office validated 6,933 of them” -- ballots that Recorder Fontes acknowledges would not have been counted under Recorder Purcell.75 This total -- 6,933 votes -- does not exceed the vote differential in any of the three close statewide races. Nonetheless, as stated in the context of emergency voting centers, the eventual impact of the Recorder’s decision has no bearing on the appropriateness or the motivation of the decision. ​See ​Joseph Flaherty, Phoenix New Times, ​GOP Ballot Lawsuit Settlement Brings Unintended Benefit for Rural Voters​ (Nov. 9, 2018), ​available at https://www.phoenixnewtimes.com/news/arizona-gop-election-lawsuit-unintended-benefit-rural-voters-110 15562​. 74 State Senator Michelle Ugenti-Rita has already introduced legislation addressing this topic. 75 ​Yellow Sheet Report​, November 26, 2018 (“Fontes Stole The Election With 6,933 Cured Ballots”). 73 14 3. Partisanship of Recorder Fontes The election for Maricopa County Recorder is a partisan race that features candidates explicitly linked to political parties. Recorder Fontes won the 2016 election as a Democrat. He seemingly embraces many traditionally left-of-center causes such as raising the minimum wage76 and expanding public transportation projects like light rail,77 and he affiliates with politically left-of-center organizations such as the Arena’s candidate training program.78 His partisan affiliation and statements about matters of public policy are, of course, permissible and perhaps even encouraged by the partisan nature of the election for County Recorder. However, this Review analyzes if Recorder Fontes behaved in a partisan manner that was implicitly or explicitly advantageous or detrimental to Arizona Democrats or Republicans. 3A. Implicit Partisanship In the immediate aftermath of the closely-contested November election, multiple parties filed lawsuits challenging certain decisions made by the Recorder, such as the decision to open emergency voting centers or the decision to continue rehabilitating ballots. In response to lawsuits brought by the Republican Party and comments made by Republican Party Chairman Jonathan Lines, the Recorder responded with open hostility. Following the filing of one lawsuit by the Republican Party, Recorder Fontes tweeted “Bring it.”79 Perhaps such comments are to be expected if one feels that one’s professional practices are being unfairly called into question through public lawsuit. Additionally, Recorder Fontes is reported to be somebody who freely shares his emotions, even previously going so far as to tell one critical ​Democratic candidate​ to “go F- yourself … by the way, is your Mom also running your campaign? She seems to solve all your other problems.”80 But the “Bring it” comment stands in contrast to the absence of a comments with regard to a suit filed by the left-of-center Arizona Advocacy Network which alleged that “[t]he polling sites in all 40 vote center locations and at least 9 regular polling places Adrian Fontes (@RecorderFontes). (Jan. 1, 2018). Tweet, ​available at https://twitter.com/Adrian_Fontes/status/1080136671230738432​. 77 Adrian Fontes (@RecorderFontes). (Dec. 11, 2018). Tweet, ​available at https://twitter.com/Adrian_Fontes/status/1072629330189148162​. 78 Adrian Fontes (@RecorderFontes). (Dec. 12, 2018). Tweet, ​available at https://twitter.com/Adrian_Fontes/status/1072895937020747776​. 79 Adrian Fontes (@RecorderFontes). (Nov. 7, 2018). Tweet, ​available at https://twitter.com/Adrian_Fontes/status/1060401730125410304 80 Rebekah L. Sanders, Arizona Republic, ​Maricopa County elections boss tells voter criticizing mail-in ballot to 'go F- yourself'​ (Oct. 31, 2017), ​available at https://www.azcentral.com/story/news/local/phoenix/2017/10/31/county-elections-boss-adrian-fontes-tellsfellow-dem-go-f-yourself/815775001/​; ADI News Service, ​Fontes Tells Maricopa County Voter, Candidate “Go F-Yourself” ​(Nov. 1, 2017), ​available at https://arizonadailyindependent.com/2017/11/01/fontes-tells-maricopa-county-voter-candidate-go-f-yourse lf/​. 76 15 failed to open at 6:00 a.m.,” and the lawsuit filed by the Arizona Democratic Party demanding that Recorder Fontes “turn over public records relating to conditional provisional ballots, out-of-precinct ballots, and ballots not counted.”81 Recorder Fontes persisted in making negative comments and insinuations about the Republican Party and Chairman Jonathan Lines in the weeks following the election: “I’m concerned that some folks just don’t want Maricopa County voters to vote, and they don’t want us to help voters get their voices heard. That’s what bothers me.”82 And “Mr. Lines and his hyperbole are bad for our democracy.” He also stated that the Chairman’s effort to investigate the election process through this Review was “nonsense” and “childish,” and that he would not participate in the Review.83 Perhaps these comments regarding the Republican Party and Chairman Lines are well-founded, perhaps they are not. That likely depends on a personal, partisan point of view. However, these comments have caused some Republican voters to reasonably question whether Recorder Fontes is a neutral arbiter of the election tabulation process, or one who lets his obvious disdain for the Republican Party influence his actions as Recorder. This narrative is further supported by the disparate treatment of Republican County Supervisor Steve Chucri and Democrat County Supervisor Steve Gallardo in the context of the emergency voting centers. As previously noted, Democrat Gallardo purportedly requested that Recorder Fontes open an emergency voting center in Tolleson so as to better assist the voters in Gallardo’s district. Recorder Fontes complied and worked with Supervisor Gallardo to expand emergency voting. By contrast, Republican Supervisor Chucri said he was not consulted about the locations of the emergency voting centers, and he was not even informed of the expansion of the emergency voting centers prior to their public announcement.84 Additionally, in an email to Recorder Fontes dated Monday, November 5 (the day before Election Day), Supervisor Chucri told Recorder Fontes that “[d]ue to recent inquiries, I am formally asking you to place aside all ballots cast at emergency voting sites after early voting ended on Friday, November 2, 2018, until your legal authority to open emergency sites has been clarified.”85 Chucri claims that he received no response from Recorder Fontes on this topic. This Review has sought an interview with Recorder Fontes regarding this interplay, but Recorder Fontes has not responded. As it ​Yellow Sheet Report​, November 9, 2018 (“If Both Sides Sue, Are You Doing Something Right?”). Jeremy Duda, AZ Mirror, ​Arizona GOP threatens legal action over emergency voting, early ballot verification​ (Nov. 6, 2018), ​available at https://www.azmirror.com/2018/11/06/arizona-gop-threatens-legal-action-over-emergency-voting-early-bal lot-verification/​. 83 ​Yellow Sheet Report​, November 15, 2018 (“Fontes Ain’t Got Time For That”). 84 Conversation with Supervisor Steve Chucri. 85 Email from Steve Chucri to Adrian Fontes, November 5, 2018, attached as Exhibit J. 81 82 16 stands, this juxtaposition of treatment between Democrat Supervisor Gallardo and Republican Supervisor Chucri on the topic of emergency voting centers would, again, allow an observer to plausibly suspect that Recorder Fontes is not a neutral arbiter of the voting process. 3.B. Explicit Partisanship During the interview process of this Review, multiple credible sources alleged that Recorder Fontes behaved in an inappropriately partisan behavior to the advantage of certain candidates or political entities. However, this Review cannot confirm or deny these allegations -- or comment on their likelihood -- without documents from the Recorder’s Office and interviews with the Office. The allegations of partisanship put forward by credible sources are as follows: ● That, as described above, Recorder Fontes coordinated with Democrat Kyrsten Sinema’s campaign by privately disclosing the timing and location of the emergency voting centers without offering the same information to Republican Martha McSally’s campaign; ● That Recorder Fontes sent instructive and helpful private text messages to attorney Roopali Desai and/or other members of the law firm Coppersmith Brockelman PLC, counsel for the Arizona Democratic Party, regarding the fact that they would need to sue his office to obtain certain information regarding voter records, but that Recorder Fontes did not provide the same information to the attorneys representing the Martha McSally campaign or the Arizona Republican Party; ● That Recorder Fontes helped place people with the campaign firm Zero Week Solutions, which assisted the Arizona Democratic Party. These allegations reveal the absence of a code of conduct for the Recorder. As such, even if certain allegations of explicit partisanship were demonstrated to be true (particularly the third bullet point), it is uncertain if they would merit some form of censure. 17 4A. Fraud and Voting Irregularities Allegations of fraud in the 2018 Arizona elections reached the highest levels of American politics, with even the President of the United States claiming fraud and questioning the need for a new election.86 This Review evaluated individual reports of fraud or voting irregularities. The most consistent and most credible of these reports took the form of voters who reported that the ballots they received on Election Day had been pre-marked with Democratic candidates. The signed declaration of voter Ted Butler is illustrative. Butler was among the first to vote at approximately 6:00 a.m. at Gloria Dei Church. The ballot he received “had been pre-marked to select Democrat candidate Kyrsten Sinema for office of United States Senator and Democrat candidate Greg Stanton for the office of United States Representative for the Ninth District of Arizona.”87 Butler conveyed this information to election officials, as did other voters who allegedly received pre-marked ballots.88 This Review has requested documents and interviews to ascertain if the Recorder’s Office investigated such claims and if it received an equal number of complaints regarding ballots pre-marked with Republican candidates as it did ballots pre-marked with Democrats. Also concerning are allegations made of ballot harvesting and allegations of efforts being made to find ballots in the trash and vote the ballot. The declaration of Allie McCann is representative. McCann alleges that two individuals purportedly from a group called “Arizona Wins” asked McCann if she “would be interested in helping … Democrat candidates … [by] rummag[ing] through dumpsters to find discarded unvoted early ballots” and then mark those ballots and mail them.89 This Review hopes that these issues, and the issue of pre-printed ballots, are investigated by the Recorder’s Office so as to forestall future incidents. However, at this time, this Review has no evidence that links these particularized instances of fraud and/or voting irregularities to a widespread, preconcerted plan by the Recorder or anyone within the Recorder’s Office. 86 Yvonne Wingett Sanchez, Arizona Republic, Trump joins GOP claims of Arizona election tampering as Sinema's lead over McSally holds (Nov. 9, 2018), ​available at https://www.azcentral.com/story/news/politics/elections/2018/11/09/donald-trump-accuse-arizona-election -corruption-tweet-sinema-mcsally/1946293002/​. 87 Declaration of Ted Butler attached as Exhibit K. 88 Obtained through public records request from Secretary of State’s Office, attached as Exhibit L. 89 Declaration of Allie McCann attached as Exhibit M. 18 About the Process of This Review Arizona Republican Party Chairman Jonathan Lines authorized this Review on November 15, 2018. In the weeks following that announcement, the author of this Review conducted in-person or telephone interviews with 37 individuals for background information, to ask about particular information, and to learn about individual Election Day experiences. These interviews included conservations with: ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● Elected members of the Arizona state legislature Elected supervisors on the Maricopa County Board of Supervisors Officials in Michelle Reagan’s Secretary of State Office County Recorders of other counties Former Maricopa County Recorder Helen Purcell Staff members of the Arizona state legislature Staff members of the Maricopa County Board of Supervisors Election law attorneys familiar with the November 2018 election Campaign staff involved in the November 2018 election Election Day poll monitors, inspectors, and observers Voters Recorder Fontes has not accepted a request for an interview. In addition to the above interviews, this Review made a public website available whereby people with information could anonymously submit information to an email account. This Review received 27 submissions to that email account. This Review also submitted multiple public records requests: three to the Maricopa County Recorder’s Office, one to the Arizona Secretary of State’s Office, one to the Arizona House of Representatives, and one to the Arizona Senate. Those requests and the resulting documents are attached as exhibits. About the Partisan Nature of This Review Although this Review was commissioned by a partisan entity (The Arizona Republican Party) and conducted by a registered Republican (Stephen Richer), this report is intended to be grounded in the available evidence, and the conclusions are intended to be measured assessments of the available evidence. 19 About the Author of the Review Stephen Richer is an attorney in the downtown Phoenix office of an international law firm headquartered in Washington, DC. However, Stephen conducted this report as an independent volunteer for the Arizona Republican Party, and not as a member of his firm. Stephen received no compensation for the time he spent on this report from the Arizona Republican Party, nor from any other entity. Nor did he receive any pro bono credit from his firm for the time he spent on the report. Stephen is a registered Republican and was previously a Republican precinct committeeman. Stephen donated to over 25 Republican candidates in 2018 and led a volunteer coalition for Martha McSally’s candidacy for U.S. Senate.90 However, as noted above, this report is intended to be rooted in available evidence, not partisan dissatisfaction. Kory Langhofer and Thomas Basile of Statecraft Law, counsel for the Arizona Republican Party, advised on background for this Review. Kathleen Amundson, Merissa Hamilton, and Ryan Regula provided volunteer research assistance. As astutely noted by Jeremy Duda, AZ Mirror, ​Arizona GOP chairman makes false allegations against Fontes​ (Nov. 21, 2018), ​available at https://www.azmirror.com/blog/arizona-gop-chairman-makes-false-allegations-against-fontes/​. 90 20 EXHIBITS A. B. C. D. E. F. G. H. I. J. K. L. M. Maricopa County Internal Audit Department Interim Report Berry Dunn Report of Observations and Recommendations November 10, 2018 public records request to Recorder’s Office December 17, 2018 public records request to Recorder’s Office January 1, 2019 public records request to Recorder’s Office Requests for interview sent to Recorder Fontes Documents produced by Arizona Senate in response to public records request October 30, 2018 Tweet by Adrian Fontes Republican Party Pre-Hearing Memorandum of Plaintiffs-Intervenors Arizona Republican Party and Public Integrity Alliance Email from Supervisor Steve Chucri to Recorder Fontes on November 15, 2018 Declaration of Ted Butler Documents produced by Secretary of State’s Office in response to public records request Declaration of Allie McCann 21 EXHIBIT A (Maricopa County Internal Audit Department Interim Report) Maricopa County Phone: 602-506-1585 Fax: 602-506-8957 www.maricopa.gov Internal Audit Department 301 West Jefferson, Suite 660 Phoenix, AZ 85003-2143 Interim Report September 21, 2018 Maricopa County Board of Supervisors 301 W. Jefferson Street, 10th Floor Phoenix, AZ 85003 Board of Supervisors: At your request, the Maricopa County Internal Audit Department (Internal Audit) is conducting a review of Election Day activities overseen by the Maricopa County Recorder’s Office (Recorder’s Office). In light of recent events surrounding the primary election on August 28, 2018, we are reviewing key issues relating to the primary election that may significantly impact the November 6, 2018 general election. The purpose of this interim report is to provide information and recommendations early enough for key corrective actions to be implemented for the general election. Our focus is to identify preliminary issues related to polling locations that opened late during the primary election and make meaningful recommendations. In addition, we are determining if proper contingency plans are in place to address unanticipated problems that may arise. This report does not address all issues related to the primary election. However, as this engagement continues, additional issues may be included in our scope of work. This report does not provide information related to the Recorder’s Office use of an outside contractor to set up voter check-in systems at voting locations. We are still in the process of reviewing information related to these services. Once we have completed our review, we will provide any recommendations needed to affect positive change for the upcoming general election. The results contained in this report are based on conditions in effect at the time of our work. We did not perform an audit, which would include detailed testing. Our review is limited and may not detect all deficiencies, errors, and irregularities that may exist. The Recorder’s Office is responsible for establishing and maintaining an effective system of internal controls and procedures to provide reasonable assurance that all relevant laws and policies are followed. Attached are the preliminary issues identified, related recommendations, and responses provided by the Recorder’s Office on September 20, 2018. This report is intended for the information of the party listed above. However, this report is a public record and its distribution is not limited. Please let me know if you have any questions. Sincerely, Michael McGee Michael McGee Maricopa County Auditor BACKGROUND The Recorder’s Office provides document recording and voter registration services required by statute. Pursuant to a charter originally promulgated in 1955 with the Board of Supervisors (BOS), the Recorder’s Office also provides elections services. We will refer to the Recorder’s Office throughout this report when discussing election services. The Recorder’s Office was responsible for implementing the Maricopa County Board Approved Primary and General Election Plan which called for 503 sites where registered voters could cast their votes on Election Day. The locations included: • 40 vote centers strategically placed throughout the County that allowed any Maricopa County registered voter to cast a provisional ballot. The provisional ballot could be counted, even though it was cast out of precinct, because the vote centers were equipped with systems and printers that would verify voter information and print a ballot specific to the voter’s assigned precinct. • 463 polling locations with assigned precincts that allowed registered voters assigned to those precincts to vote. Vote centers and polling locations are staffed with poll workers, including inspectors (responsible for overseeing operations at one polling locations) and troubleshooters (assigned to 6-8 locations, providing assistance and guidance). During the primary election, the Recorder’s Office used an electronic voter check-in and ballot printing system that was implemented in the November 2017 jurisdictional election and the February 2018 special election in the 8th Congressional District. The system includes electronic SiteBooks to enable voter check-in and ballot printers to produce the required ballot for each voter. The system was implemented in order to (1) decrease the time required to vote in-person, reducing lines at polling places, (2) provide locations where registered voters from any precinct may vote, and (3) reduce the number of uncounted provisional ballots due to ballots cast at the wrong location. SiteBooks were used at the 40 vote centers and the 463 polling locations in order to electronically checkin voters and verify they had not already voted by mail or at a vote center. During the primary election, some voters were not able to vote at their designated polling locations because some locations did not open on time. The SiteBook setup process described in this report is a key factor that contributed to the late opening of polling locations. The current plan for the general election is to use a similar number of polling locations and vote centers. There were approximately 100,000 voters that cast an in-person ballot during the primary election. The Recorder’s Office projects that there will be over 240,000 in-person ballots cast during the general election. As identified in this interim report, this projected increase in turnout creates a need for the Recorder’s Office to develop procedures that address contingencies, setup, resource planning, and project management. CONTINGENCY PLANNING Preliminary Issue: The Recorder’s Office asserted that 62 voting locations out of 503 were not operational at 6:00am on primary Election Day but were fully operational by 11:33am. The Recorder’s Office also asserts that SiteBooks were not operational at these sites and that vote centers served as a contingency for some voters to cast a ballot. We have not yet validated the assertions of times and places. There was no plan to provide onsite voting options which created inconveniences for voters, among other issues. In addition, we noted that vote centers were not included in the disaster recovery plan for Page 2 of 5 elections services and not presented to the Board of Supervisors as part of a contingency plan. While troubleshooters and inspectors may have received some training related to the vote centers, many poll workers did not. Recommendation: Implement training and procedures that provide options for voters to remain onsite and vote if equipment is not operational, in addition to providing vote centers. Enhance training and procedures to provide voters with handouts showing the locations of all 40 vote centers, and describing the differences between using a vote center and voting at their designated polling location. Recorder’s Office Response: The assertion that “…the vote centers were not included in the …plan…and not presented to the Board of Supervisors…” is not completely correct, as evidenced by the fact that training materials and instructions specifically indicated the availability of vote centers for emergencies. Had these contingencies not been part of the plan, they would not have been included in the training. Additionally, had the vote center model not been available as a part of the contingency, we could not have handled the record turnout the Elections Department did. The plan worked. Preliminary Issue: Individual polling locations may experience longer lines as a result of higher turnout during the general election. During the primary election, there were no procedures in place to sufficiently monitor voter traffic and to redeploy voting equipment and staffing resources from low-traffic voting locations to higher-traffic locations. The Recorder’s Office maintains a reserve of SiteBooks and other equipment that can be deployed, however, these resources may not be sufficient considering the projected turnout for the general election. Recommendation: Implement procedures to measure line wait times and voter check-in activity at individual voting locations throughout the day and quickly redeploy resources as needed. Recorder’s Office Response: The issue that “…there were no procedures in place to sufficiently monitor voter traffic and to redeploy voting equipment and staffing resources…” is false. Pollworkers were calling into the evening, as instructed in their training, to contact Troubleshooters or Headquarters where long lines were occurring. Additional staff and equipment were immediately deployed to the only two locations in the County with long lines. Importantly, under previous systems, the number of voters standing in these lines would have taken several hours to check-in. These lines moved quickly due to the speed of the new SiteBook check-in system. SCHEDULING AND LOCATION SETUP Preliminary Issue: The setup process at voting locations includes coordinating schedules, gaining facility access, and setting up equipment. During the primary election a troubleshooter, inspector, and contracted technician were required to be present in order to set up SiteBook equipment. If one person fell behind, all other routes could be impacted. Only contracted technicians were authorized and trained to set up SiteBook equipment. There was no backup plan in place for setting up the equipment if a technician did not show up at the scheduled time. In addition, if SiteBooks malfunctioned after setup, poll workers could not diagnose the problem or address minor issues since troubleshooters and inspectors were not trained to setup SiteBooks. Note - The issue above is one of the key issues that contributed to the delays in opening voting locations. Recommendation: As a backup plan, provide each troubleshooter, inspector, and technician with the training and authority to set up SiteBooks and diagnose setup issues on their own. Page 3 of 5 Recorder’s Office Response: In reference to…“There was no back-up plan in place to set up the equipment if a technician did not show up at the scheduled time.” The fact that the technician’s company guaranteed performance on a contract, then confirmed sufficient technicians in writing, then did not perform, should not be considered as a particular fault of the Elections Department, but that of the contractor who did not perform on the guarantee. Preliminary Issue: During the setup of SiteBook equipment for the primary election, there was not an effective way for the Recorder’s Office to determine which locations had operational SiteBooks. Therefore, the status could not be quickly ascertained and resources deployed if technical help was needed. Recommendation: Develop and review real-time system reports showing SiteBook connectivity and other critical activities during the setup process and throughout the election. Recorder’s Office Response: In reference to…“During setup of SiteBook equipment for the primary election, there was not an effective way for the Recorder’s Office to determine which locations were set up with operational SiteBooks.” The Elections Department relied on a “reactive” model requiring pollworkers to call in with issues. A shift to a “proactive” system of reporting includes a new dashboard system for monitoring equipment functionality will directly address this concern. The dashboard is well into design and creation phase, and should be ready for testing and implementation prior to Election Day. STAFFING, RECRUITMENT, AND TRAINING FOR THE GENERAL ELECTION Preliminary Issue: The Recorder’s Office does not plan to rehire the contractor used during the primary election for SiteBook setup and related technical expertise. Staffing resources to replace these services have not been recruited. In addition, projected higher turnout for the general election may create a need for additional poll workers and ancillary services. The Recorder’s Office asserts that a staffing plan is currently under development. Recommendation: Finalize a staffing plan that identifies all resources needed to provide the adequate services and technical expertise for the general election. Contact existing poll workers to secure commitments for the general election. Identify staffing and training gaps for all categories of election-day workers. Analyze the need for having a contingency reserve of poll workers in the event that some do not show up. Develop and execute a strategy to recruit and train all needed staffing resources as identified during the gap analysis. Recorder’s Office Response: In reference to…“Staffing resources to replace these [contractor] services have not been recruited.” The Election Department will train and rely on Troubleshooters and Pollworkers to set up and connect equipment. The Department is actively hiring additional staff to assist with technical matters in this effort. Additionally, the Department has made a request to the County Manager for 100 extra County staff members to be designated to assist with set up. PROJECT MANAGEMENT Potential Issue: Leading up to the primary election, there was not a project leader responsible for coordinating election setup activities internally between employees and externally with a contractor for outside services. Based on our preliminary review, there were logistical and communication issues, with a lack of accountability. Prior to our review, the Recorder's Office had recognized this issue and designated a person to serve as the project leader for the general election. Page 4 of 5 Recommendation: Ensure that this new project leader has the resources, support, and ability to successfully plan and execute the general election activities, while mitigating potential pitfalls. This includes ensuring collaborative communications and coordination of efforts between all persons involved to facilitate a successful election day. Recorder’s Office Response: None. FACILITIES AND EQUIPMENT Preliminary Issue: The Recorder’s Office plans to use the same facilities and equipment for the general election as was used during the primary election. A comparison of turnout at primary election locations to general election projections has not yet been completed to assess any additional facility and equipment needs. The Recorder’s Office asserts that reach out efforts have been started to shore up commitments and address spacing needs at some facilities. However, a complete analysis of predicted voter traffic at all facilities has not been completed. Recommendation: Compare voter turnout at all primary election locations to general election projections to determine if the facilities and equipment meet the needs for the general election. Contact existing voting facilities to secure commitments. Secure additional facilities as needed. Recorder’s Office Response: In reference to…“A comparison of turnout at primary election locations to general election projections has not yet been completed to assess any additional facility and equipment needs.” This is wrong. For example, as discussed with the auditors on 9/19, both the Century and Burton Barr branches of the Phoenix Public Libraries have been identified as locations where better access and more space will be necessary. The Elections Department has contacted all voting facilities, and is working with each to address issues and improve access if necessary on a case by case basis. RECORDER’S OFFICE COMMENTS The Maricopa County Recorder’s Office and Elections Department does not concur with the internal audit as submitted for the specific reasons listed above. However, as has already been shared with the audit team, every recommendation item indicated in this audit has been previously identified, and is being actively addressed for the November election. Additionally, in general terms, the audit misstates or misunderstands several critical assertions in its “Preliminary Issues” sections. INTERNAL AUDIT COMMENTS We appreciate the cooperation we’ve received from the Recorder’s Office throughout this process and look forward to a continued positive relationship as our work continues. While the Recorder’s Office may disagree with some of our preliminary issues, we are pleased that its leadership has agreed to implement the recommendations. We welcome the recent addition of an external firm to provide an expert, outside perspective of the election processes in an effort to provide additional value-added recommendations for the upcoming general election. Page 5 of 5 EXHIBIT (Berry Dunn Report of Observations and Recommendations) Maricopa County Recorder’s Office – Election Day Processes and Related Issues Report of Observations and Recommendations November 2, 2018 Prepared for: Maricopa County Internal Audit Department 301 W Jefferson, Suite 660 Phoenix, AZ 85003 www.berrydunn.com Maricopa County Recorder’s Office – Election Day Processes and Related Issues Report of Observations and Recommendations Table of Contents Section Page 1. Executive Summary ............................................................................................................. 1 2. Project Background ............................................................................................................. 3 3. Scope .................................................................................................................................... 4 4. Approach .............................................................................................................................. 5 5. Assumptions and Constraints ............................................................................................ 6 6. Work Performed ................................................................................................................... 7 7. Common Terms and Abbreviations ................................................................................. 11 8. Observations and Recommendations ............................................................................. 12 9. 8.1 Staffing and Training .................................................................................................... 12 8.2 Technology Management ............................................................................................. 19 8.3 Project Management .................................................................................................... 24 Future Election Recommendations for Improvement .................................................... 29 Report of Observations and Recommendations Page i 1. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The experience of Maricopa County (the County), Arizona, in the Primary Election held on August 28, 2018, led to County Board of Supervisors’ (Board’s) concerns about the successful execution of the General Election to be held on November 6, 2018. Those concerns led the Board to direct the County Internal Audit Department (IAD) to conduct an assessment of election planning and Election Day activities, and to engage an external consultant to provide consulting services to follow up on, and supplement, that assessment. Berry Dunn McNeil & Parker, LLC (BerryDunn or the Firm) was engaged to provide the requested consulting services related to County Recorder’s Office (Office) processes for planning and executing the Election Day activities for the Primary Election, and to provide recommendations for future elections. These consulting services do not constitute an audit, examination, or attestation of any type. The scope of services for this engagement included an assessment of the Office’s progress on recommendations made by IAD in its Interim Report dated September 21, 2018. Subsequent clarification of the scope highlighted the forwardlooking nature of services to be performed, including an emphasis on recommendations that could be effectively implemented before the General Election, as well as any direct assistance BerryDunn could provide to support those recommendations. By far, the most prominent environmental factor in defining the scope and schedule of the project, as well as the nature of recommendations and timing of their communication, was time constraint. BerryDunn was engaged on September 20, 2018, and the immovable date of the General Election is November 6, 2018. BerryDunn’s approach to conducting this engagement included: participating in a knowledge transfer with IAD, obtaining documentation from the Office, directly observing activities of and interviewing Office staff, and attending internal meetings of the Office. BerryDunn communicated observations and recommendations to IAD and the Office throughout the engagement; this report summarizes these items previously communicated, and describes the project itself. This report reflects information received through the original response deadline of October 26, 2018. Information received between October 27, 2018 and October 30, 2018 was noted in the relevant sections of the report. BerryDunn’s observations and recommendations are grouped into the following categories: staffing and training, technology management, and project management. The observations reflect a theme of significant effort by the Office to address problems experienced during the Primary Election, and the recommendations reflect an absence of systematized management tools, processes, and communication to ensure the implementation of planned solutions. The recommendations need to be read in their entirety to convey the actions necessary for optimal short-term results. However, BerryDunn identified the compilation of a staffing analysis—which would identify recruiting and training requirements, the current roster of filled positions, and the resulting gaps—as an absolutely critical component of a project-wide staffing plan that should be completed, continually updated and monitored, and properly communicated as soon as possible. Additionally, BerryDunn believes that the Office management team should conduct Report of Observations and Recommendations Page 1 structured tabletop sessions to clarify roles, responsibilities, and actions to be taken in the event of various scenarios; these sessions may significantly reduce the risk of insufficient response to adverse events on Election Day. BerryDunn’s recommendations include items the Firm believes could be addressed prior to the General Election, and have been communicated to the Office during the course of this engagement, prior to the date of this report. (BerryDunn’s short-term recommendations are included in Section 8 – Observations and Recommendations.) BerryDunn has also included recommendations that could not realistically be implemented in the short timeframe between the point when the Firm identified the potential improvement and the General Election. (These recommendations are included in Section 9 – Future Election Recommendations for Improvement.) The recommendations in Section 9 reflect both potential improvements in project management for areas BerryDunn specifically observed, as well as best practices for areas the Firm did not have the opportunity to observe due to constraints on time or availability of Office staff. Certain short-term recommendations that BerryDunn verbally communicated appear to have been implemented during the course of this assessment; therefore, these recommendations are not necessarily highlighted in this report. Report of Observations and Recommendations Page 2 2. PROJECT BACKGROUND The County engaged BerryDunn to conduct an assessment of the Office’s processes for planning and executing Election Day activities. The objective of the assessment was to support the Office in achieving its mission to provide access to the electoral process for citizens, jurisdictions, candidates, the legislature, and special interest groups. The scope included consideration of the efficiency and effectiveness of the Office’s election activities. The areas of focus included: • Readiness planning/project management • Staffing plans and training • Election Day setup • Contingency planning During Phase 1 of the project, BerryDunn conducted initial project planning activities, as well as reviewed and finalized the Project Work Plan and Schedule. BerryDunn also reviewed existing County documentation, conducted interviews and work sessions with the project manager and IAD stakeholders, and provided weekly status updates to IAD. In Phase 2, BerryDunn conducted an on-site kickoff meeting and various forms of fact-finding activities, including document reviews, interviews, and walkthroughs. As a result of the Firm’s fact-finding activities, BerryDunn discussed with the Office preliminary observations and opportunities for improvement. In the final phase, Phase 3, BerryDunn submitted a draft Report of Observations and Recommendations (the Report) that included the Firm’s assessment, supported by its observations, fact-finding interviews, and document reviews. The recommendation sections included short-term solutions to improve the operation of the General Election on November 6, 2018, and long-term solutions to improve the operation of future elections, when applicable. BerryDunn conducted a walkthrough of the draft report prior to submission of this final Report. Report of Observations and Recommendations Page 3 3. SCOPE The scope of work was clarified as described below and communicated to the Office: • • Assess the process of planning Election Day activities, including staffing and recruitment, project management, training, communications, scheduling, location setup, equipment readiness, facility and warehouse logistics, and other election readiness activities as identified during the assessment Assess the process of executing Election Day activities, including opening of vote locations, line management, and staff management that occur prior to October 30 • Assess contingency procedures related to unexpected problems encountered during setup and Election Day activities • Assess any other activities deemed critical to executing a successful election • Due to time constraints and a desire for corrective actions prior to the General Election on November 6, 2018, provide interim recommendations and briefings as requested • Assess whether previous recommendations for improvement, as described in the County Auditor’s Interim Report dated September 21, 2018, are adequately implemented • Perform other activities, such as attending meetings, and provide deliverables as requested • Adhere to any administrative requirements as is customary for this type of engagement Report of Observations and Recommendations Page 4 4. APPROACH BerryDunn prioritized the areas to be assessed based on imminent risk to the processes supporting the upcoming General Election on November 6, 2018. BerryDunn’s objective was to assist the Office in mitigating risks to a successful General Election by reviewing and assessing opportunities for improvement from previous elections, and assessing planning and execution of Election Day activities. BerryDunn’s planned approach included: • Assisting with project management activities throughout the project • Assessing mitigation effort of previously identified issues • Leveraging elections expertise • Analyzing project documents received from the Office • Reviewing prior elections to assess project risks and issues • Assessing project resource staffing and assignments • Assessing project milestones and scheduling • Assessing the project work plan • Interviewing and observing project manager and project leads • Communicating recommendations as developed during the engagement to allow for implementation in time to benefit Election Day processes for the upcoming General Election Report of Observations and Recommendations Page 5 5. ASSUMPTIONS AND CONSTRAINTS An assumption is anything that is believed to be true but that has not been verified. Assumptions can relate to something in the present or in the future, and are beyond the control of a project. Assumptions are therefore a source of potential project risk. BerryDunn made the following assumptions related to this assessment: • Information conveyed in meetings and interviews is accurate to the best of the knowledge of the individual conveying that information • Information conveyed in received documents is accurate • Office staff intend to implement plans of action as described to BerryDunn A constraint is a factor that imposes a limitation on a project; for example, limits on time, schedule, resources, or scope. BerryDunn encountered the following constraints related to this assessment: • Limited time to complete assessment before the General Election (November 6, 2018) • Limited scope due to compressed project timeline • BerryDunn had originally planned on more participation by a team member with project management expertise and elections process experience The limitations on the project imposed by the compressed timeline and loss of access to the Office by a team member, as noted above, resulted in greater emphasis on assessment of, rather than assistance with, project management activities. Report of Observations and Recommendations Page 6 6. WORK PERFORMED BerryDunn performed a variety of fact-finding activities in order to obtain insight and gather information necessary to perform an assessment of processes for planning and executing Election Day activities. These fact-finding activities included knowledge transfer sessions with IAD, interviews with Office staff, observations of Office management meetings, and observations of Office training activities. Table 6.1 describes meetings BerryDunn attended as part of fact-finding activities. Table 6.1: Fact-Finding Meetings Meeting Title Date Knowledge Transfer Work Session With IAD September 26, 2018 Knowledge Transfer Work Session With IAD September 27, 2018 Kickoff Meeting With the Office October 1, 2018 The Office’s Warehouse Walkthrough October 1, 2018 Interview With the Chief Deputy October 1, 2018 Chiefs of Staff Meeting October 3, 2018 Interview With the Elections Policy Officer October 5, 2018 Interview With the Personal Computer (PC)/Local Area Network (LAN) Technician Senior/Lead October 9, 2018 Interview With the Chief Deputy October 10, 2018 The Office’s Weekly Management Meeting October 10, 2018 Interview With the Application Development Manager October 11, 2018 The Office’s Weekly Management Meeting October 17, 2018 Board Worker Training October 18, 2018 Preliminary Observations and Recommendations Meeting October 19, 2018 Weekly Office Meeting October 19, 2018 Meeting With the Chief Deputy October 23, 2018 Dashboard Demonstration October 26, 2018 Meeting With the Chief Deputy and the Assistant Director of Election Services October 29, 2018 In addition to meetings and interviews, BerryDunn requested and reviewed documentation related to the planning and execution of Election Day activities. BerryDunn requested documentation from the Office related to staffing and training, technology management, and project management. BerryDunn also completed an online training course and attended an inperson training session for board workers. Table 6.2, on the following page, describes documents requested from the Office and indicates whether the Firm received the document. Report of Observations and Recommendations Page 7 Additionally, BerryDunn reviewed background documentation provided by IAD, including supporting documentation for the County Auditor’s Interim Report. (This documentation is not included in Table 6.2.) Table 6.2: Documentation Requested and Status Requested Item Staffing and recruiting spreadsheets, along with any related staffing plans Schedule of all completed and future election worker trainings Status Provided Provided Document(s) Received • Board Worker Recruitment Report Screenshot • Elections Worker Spreadsheet • IT Troubleshooter Spreadsheet • Monday Setup Tech Spreadsheet • County Employee Spreadsheet • Troubleshooter Spreadsheet • Staffing plan for 2018 General Election • Training Calendar for Board Workers • Training Schedule for Information Technology (IT) Troubleshooters on Eventbrite Website • Training Schedule for IT Setup Employees on Eventbrite • Central Board Worker Schedule on Eventbrite List of all routes with schedules for workers responsible for setting up SiteBooks at polling locations Partially provided – specific assignments will not be started to be scheduled until October 29, 2018; expected to be completed November 1, 2018 • Troubleshooter Routes Copy of contingency and escalation procedures, along with a description of how election workers will be trained on, and have access to, these procedures Provided • Draft of Emergency SiteBooks Procedures • Emergency Packet Procedures Report of Observations and Recommendations Page 8 Requested Item Status Document(s) Received Copy of any handouts that election workers will provide to voters for alternative voting options if the voting equipment is not operational, or if a voter is in the wrong “assigned polling place” Provided • General Vote Center – Election Day Flyer Voter turnout at each voting location during the Primary Election and any analysis of projected turnout for each location during the General Election Partially provided – analysis of projected turnout for each location has not been provided • Facility Ballot Counts Advertisement Plan Provided • Media Statement of Work for General and Primary Elections • Memo 2018 Election Communication List of issues compiled Provided • Training Issues – Primary 2018 Inspector packet checklists Provided • Inspector Setup Packet and Checklist Access to online training Provided • Election Day Training Manual • Access to Training Website Draft accountability checklist for closing procedures Provided • Draft Accountability Checklist IT Troubleshooter Coverage Plan (projection of how many locations each IT troubleshooter potentially covers) Provided • IT Troubleshooter Deployment Plan Training material (for troubleshooters) that includes contingency procedures Not provided – the Office reported this item was in progress as of October 29, 2018 N/A Staging locations Provided • Email With Staging Location Addresses Letter to facilities Provided • Draft of Thank You Letter to Facilities Report of Observations and Recommendations Page 9 Requested Item Status Document(s) Received Voting sites with connectivity issues Provided • Spreadsheet of Voting Sites With Connectivity Issues Communications Plan Provided • 2018 Elections Communications Plan Throughout the project, BerryDunn communicated observations and short-term recommendations to the Office, with the intent that the Office could implement short-term recommendations before the General Election. Report of Observations and Recommendations Page 10 7. COMMON TERMS AND ABBREVIATIONS Table 7.1 provides a list of common terms and abbreviations definitions used throughout the report. Table 7.1: Common Terms and Abbreviations Common Terms and Abbreviations Term BerryDunn Board Board worker County County worker IAD IT troubleshooter MCTEC Definition Berry Dunn McNeil & Parker, LLC County Board of Supervisors A worker at a polling place on Election Day; positions include inspector, judge, marshal, and clerks (printer clerk and ballot clerk) Maricopa County County employee who will work during the election Maricopa County Internal Audit Department Information technology troubleshooter: a worker that will provide technical support for election equipment setup and on Election Day Maricopa County Tabulation and Election Center MoFi Wireless router Office Recorder’s Office Poll worker Troubleshooter A worker at a polling place on Election Day; positions include board workers and troubleshooters A worker assigned to monitor and assist three to four polling places during election equipment setup and on Election Day Report of Observations and Recommendations Page 11 8. OBSERVATIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 8.1 Staffing and Training BerryDunn identified and reviewed issues related to staffing and training as a primary component of this assessment. The Firm focused on assessing the following items relative to staffing for Election Day activities and day before Election Day setup activities: • Adequacy of recruiting targets for Election Day and Monday before Election Day setup workers, and progress toward those recruiting targets • Sufficiency of role-specific trainings provided to election workers Table 8.1 provides a description of each issue; related Interim Report recommendations from IAD; BerryDunn’s observations; BerryDunn’s assessment; and BerryDunn’s short-term recommendations. Short-term recommendations are intended to be implemented before the General Election. Please note that some short-term recommendations that were informally communicated to the Office, and subsequently implemented, have not been listed in the short-term recommendation sections. Table 8.1: Staffing and Training Observations and Recommendations Staffing and Training Observations and Recommendations No. 8.1.1 Issue Description Sufficient staffing for Election Day activities Related Interim Report Recommendations Finalize a staffing plan that identifies all resources needed to provide adequate and technical expertise for the General Election. Overall Staffing Plan for the General Election: Observations There will be a total of 503 sites where registered voters can cast their votes on Election Day, which will consist of 463 polling locations and 40 vote centers. The Office plans to staff 461 polling locations with at least five poll workers: one inspector, two judges, one marshal, and one or more clerks (e.g., ballot clerk and print clerk). Two polling locations will be staffed by three workers because there are less than 300 people who are eligible to vote in these areas. The Office plans to staff the 40 vote centers with at least eight poll workers. BerryDunn obtained a staffing plan for 494 sites that has a recruitment goal and the number of workers hired for each role. This staffing plan excludes one polling location and eight vote centers. The polling location excluded from this staffing plan is very remote, and the Office plans to use its Report of Observations and Recommendations Page 12 Staffing and Training Observations and Recommendations own permanent staff. As for the eight vote centers excluded, the Office reported that eight workers have been hired for each of five vote centers, and the remaining three vote centers will be staffed with the Office’s permanent staff. In addition, the Office plans to have 125 troubleshooters. Each troubleshooter is assigned to up to four polling locations. When any issue arises that cannot be resolved by any of the poll workers, the inspector has been instructed to call their assigned troubleshooter. Five staging area locations: There will be five staging area locations where specialized troubleshooters are located and extra equipment is stored in case any equipment at a polling location needs to be replaced or added. These locations include the Maricopa County Tabulation and Election Center (MCTEC) facility, Avondale City Hall, Surprise City Hall, Thunderbird Arts Center, and Mesa Recorder’s Office. The Office created a new role (IT troubleshooter) and plans to hire approximately 50 individuals who have some level of IT skills and experience for this position. Each of the five staging area locations will be staffed with 10 IT troubleshooters. In addition, the MCTEC facility, which is the main hub for the hotline, will be staffed with several internal IT resources, including the Office’s PC/LAN technician who is assigned as a project manager for IT-related troubleshooting. The MCTEC facility will also have two to four hotline IT troubleshooters who will be the first line to address IT-related hotline calls. As of October 29, 2018, the Office reported that it has confirmed 54 IT troubleshooters who have agreed to work on both setup day and Election Day. Monday Setup Staffing Plan: The Office plans to have all polling locations set up by assigned poll workers, as in previous elections. Inspectors are responsible for contacting their facilities to schedule a setup date and time by October 31, 2018, and notifying poll workers of their assignments. In order to ensure the polling locations are set timely by end of day on Monday, the Office asked the facilities’ owners/managers if they could set up prior to Monday. Forty-five facilities agreed to permit setup on either Saturday, November 3, 2018, or Sunday, November 4, 2018. The other 417 locations will be set up on Monday (day before Election Day). The Office plans to utilize poll workers for SiteBooks setup instead of hiring a third-party contractor. The Office plans to have at least one person for each polling location who has been trained in person on setting up of SiteBooks. The Office first made an inquiry of inspectors to assess whether they were comfortable with setting up SiteBooks. For sites where the inspector indicated a lack of confidence in performing SiteBooks setup, that function will be completed by a troubleshooter or a County worker. Each Report of Observations and Recommendations Page 13 Staffing and Training Observations and Recommendations troubleshooter and County worker will be responsible for up to two polling sites. The Office reported that 121 County workers have confirmed to assist with Monday setup as of October 29, 2018. Election Day Staffing Plan: In order to ensure any remaining issues are addressed before the opening of polling locations at 6:00 a.m. on Election Day, the Office extended poll workers’ labor hours to start at 5:00 a.m. rather than the 5:30 a.m. start time utilized in the Primary Election. All poll workers will be asked to arrive at the location by 5:00 a.m. on Election Day. Poll Worker Staffing: The Office has determined its recruitment goals for each role/position; however, BerryDunn has not been able to assess whether these goals are sufficient to operate all 503 polling locations because these numbers are not based on a documented forecast of expected turnout for the General Election. The Office’s recruitment effort of poll workers for 495 polling locations has demonstrated progress toward the goals as below (As of October 30, 2018): Goal Assessment Filled Vacant Inspector 494 493 1 Marshal 494 481 13 Judge 496 492 4 Clerk 1 490 477 13 Clerk 2 491 480 11 Clerk/Judge 493 452 41 Extra Clerks 127 126 1 3,085 3,001 84 Total Report of Observations and Recommendations Page 14 Staffing and Training Observations and Recommendations As noted in the Observations section, these numbers exclude a staffing plan for one polling location and eight vote centers. The Office reported that these sites have been staffed. Troubleshooter Staffing: The Office has identified 125 assignments for troubleshooters. According to the staffing plan the Office provided BerryDunn on October 30, 2018, all 125 positions have been filled. IT troubleshooter recruitment goal appears to have been met. The Office split its staff recruitment effort into several segments, and each area is managed by a different member of Office management using different systems or Excel spreadsheets. The lack of a coordinated approach and enterprise-level tool for tracking resource needs and related recruiting has resulted in an inability to obtain a clear overview of recruitment for the General Election. As of October 30, 2018, BerryDunn had not observed that all inspectors had contacted their assigned facilities and poll workers. This was planned to be completed by October 31, 2018. • Ensure the master staffing schedule includes all staff required for the General Election and is updated as quickly as possible. (BerryDunn observed that this recommendation has been implemented as of October 30, 2018.) o BerryDunn Short-Term Recommendations • A master staffing schedule will serve as a management tool to continually monitor the status of staff recruitment/assignment effort for all election activities and to help identify areas that need attention. Ensure all inspectors communicate with their assigned facilities and poll workers by October 31, 2018. (The Office reported that this will be completed by October 31, 2018. Therefore, BerryDunn did not observe the completion as of October 30, 2018.) o All facilities and poll workers should be notified with the setup schedule in advance so that they can make a plan accordingly. No. 8.1.2 Issue Description Adequate role-specific training for election workers Related Interim Report Recommendations Identify staffing and training gaps for all categories of Election Day workers. Develop and execute a strategy to recruit and train all needed staffing resources as identified during gap analysis. As a backup Report of Observations and Recommendations Page 15 Staffing and Training Observations and Recommendations plan, provide each troubleshooter, inspector, and technician with the training and authority to set up SiteBooks and diagnose setup issues on their own. The Office has created an online board worker training site that provides: Observations • Check-In Terminal (SiteBook) Setup Training Video • Election Day Training Manual • Board Worker Online Training (if a worker chooses to view the training online, he/she needs to sign in; this training includes a quiz at the end) • Board Worker Online Training PowerPoint for downloading • Board Worker In Class Training PowerPoint for downloading • Link to Training Quiz (if worker chooses to download the training presentation, he/she is asked to take the quiz to verify that he/she has completed the training) • 2018 Polling Place Wait-Time Reduction Plan All board workers are required to complete the online training regardless of their role. They can choose to download the training presentation and view it instead of signing in to take the online training. If they choose to do so, they are asked to complete the training quiz separately. The quiz page requests the worker’s name and voter ID, and includes 28 questions and a feedback field. The Office is tracking the attendance of online training by asking for the worker’s name in the quiz; however, it is not clear if any follow-up reminders are sent to workers who have not completed the quiz. In addition, the Office has indicated that following mandatory in-person training sessions are planned: Training for inspectors, judges, and troubleshooters: Following confirmation of acceptance of their assignment, an email from an online event invitation service is sent to workers with the dates of available in-person training. The email directs the recipient to sign up for a training session. The in-person training has four stations, each of which is staffed with an instructor, to demonstrate how to set up, troubleshoot (for the issues they can address without asking troubleshooters or the hotline), and take down: 1.) SiteBooks, 2.) Tabulator, 3.) Printer, and 4.) EDGE Machine (accessible voting machine for disabled voters). All attendees are asked to practice at each station. This training is intended to help ensure those board workers in a key role are familiar with all equipment, including SiteBooks, even if they are not in charge of setting the equipment up. This training takes approximately three to four hours. 47 training sessions are planned at various locations between October 18, 2018, and November 1, 2018. Report of Observations and Recommendations Page 16 Staffing and Training Observations and Recommendations Training for troubleshooters: Troubleshooters are required to take another in-person training that focuses on more detailed troubleshooting issues. The Office reported that one training session for all 125 troubleshooters is scheduled on November 3, 2018. The training material was in progress as of October 29, 2018. Training for IT troubleshooters: Five sessions of IT troubleshooter training are scheduled between November 1, 2018, and November 3, 2018. Three of these sessions are fully booked as of October 29, 2018. These sessions will cover basic troubleshooting for the more technical issues that may arise during setup and Election Day, and review Frequently Asked Questions, checklists, and most frequent scenarios. BerryDunn has not received the training material, which was in progress as of October 29, 2018. Training for County workers who will be setting up SiteBooks: The Office plans to have approximately 100 to 125 County workers in charge of setting up SiteBooks on Monday before Election Day. They are required to attend an in-person training. Six Setup Tech Boot Camp sessions have been scheduled between October 29, 2018, and November 3, 2018, and three of these sessions are fully booked as of October 29, 2018. Additionally, the Office is hosting a special training session on November 4, 2018, for a few additional temporary employees who will be helping as IT troubleshooters. The Office also plans to hold an hour-long training for the dispatchers, but the date had not been identified as of October 29, 2018. It appears that the Office has planned an adequate number of training sessions for each role. Assessment BerryDunn has attended one of the in-person training for inspectors, judges, and troubleshooters, and made recommendations based on the Firm’s observations. BerryDunn observed that these recommendations have been implemented. BerryDunn has not obtained and reviewed the training materials for troubleshooters, IT troubleshooters, the Setup Tech Boot Camp, an additional special training session, and dispatchers. • BerryDunn Short-Term Recommendations Ensure training includes contingency plan procedures for troubleshooters, IT troubleshooters, and hotline troubleshooters, and ensure all applicable workers will attend the training. (The Office reported it plans to implement this recommendation; however, BerryDunn did not receive the training materials and was not able to observe the implementation.) Report of Observations and Recommendations Page 17 Staffing and Training Observations and Recommendations o • Schedule IT troubleshooter trainings and County workers trainings, and finalize the training materials as soon as possible. (BerryDunn observed that these trainings have been scheduled as of October 29, 2018, but did not receive the training materials and therefore could not observe full implementation.) o • To ensure all workers are appropriately trained, each training day should be identified as soon as possible so that workers can accommodate their schedules accordingly. Track online training attendance and send a reminder to workers who have not completed the training. (The Office reported it is tracking attendance of online training, but BerryDunn did not received information about any reminders that have been or will be sent, and therefore could not observe full implementation.) o No. 8.1.3 Troubleshooters, IT troubleshooters, and hotline troubleshooters are expected to address various issues. It is important they are well trained and provided with tools and materials they may need. Monitoring and sending follow-up reminders will help ensure all board workers complete the online training. Issue Description Documentation and communication of setup and Election Day contingency plans Related Interim Report Recommendations Implement training and procedures that provide options for voters to remain on-site and vote if equipment is not operational, in addition to providing vote centers. Enhance training and procedures to provide voters with handouts showing the locations of all 40 vote centers, and describing the differences between using a vote center and voting at their designated polling location. Observations Inspectors are generally in charge of determining actions to be taken when issues arise at their polling locations. If an issue cannot be solved by the inspector or other polling workers, the inspector has been instructed to contact a troubleshooter. If the troubleshooter cannot resolve the issue, he/she has been instructed to call the hotline. The Office plans to use a dashboard to monitor some critical performance indicators throughout Monday before Election Day and Election Day including: connectivity of SiteBooks, voter check-in performance of SiteBook, and wait time for all polling locations. The Office plans to include detailed troubleshooting guidance in the training for troubleshooters, IT troubleshooters, and hotline workers. Report of Observations and Recommendations Page 18 Staffing and Training Observations and Recommendations Assessment The Office has updated the in-person training for board workers to include instructions on how to direct voters when on-site equipment at a polling location is not functional. A handout showing a list of the 40 vote centers has been prepared. The Office reported that each polling location will have 20 copies of this handout and additional copies will be provided as necessary. BerryDunn obtained and reviewed the Emergency Packet Procedures prepared by the Office. The packet outlines emergency procedures for poll workers and includes step-by-step guidance on how to address three different emergency situations: loss of power at facility; loss of MoFi connectivity; and SiteBook and/or printer not functioning. BerryDunn did not obtain training materials for the various troubleshooter roles, which are intended to address detailed troubleshooting guidance and contingency plans. • • BerryDunn Short-Term Recommendations • 8.2 Ensure that there is a process in place for staff to continue Election Day activities while the equipment replacement process occurs. (BerryDunn observed that this recommendation has been implemented as of October 29, 2018.) Train board workers on procedures to properly direct voters when on-site voting equipment is not operational. (BerryDunn observed that this recommendation has been implemented in the training for inspectors and judges as of October 29, 2018. The Office reported it plans to include an appropriate level of contingency procedures in the trainings for other roles; however, BerryDunn did not receive the training materials for other roles to observe the implementation.) o Poll workers need the ability to provide voters with all available voting options if on-site voting is not available, even temporarily, in order for voters to determine their preferred action in an expeditious manner. Ensure that the workers responsible for replacing equipment are clearly identified. (The Office reported this recommendation has been implemented; however, BerryDunn did not observe the implementation.) o Access to written procedures that identify which equipment will be delivered and replaced at each polling location—and who will be responsible for delivering and replacing the equipment—will help avoid confusion in case of emergency. Technology Management BerryDunn identified and reviewed issues related to technology management as a primary component of this assessment. Technology management subject areas assessed include: operability of equipment, technical support, and contingency planning Report of Observations and Recommendations Page 19 related to equipment. BerryDunn focused on issues related to the SiteBook, the computer used to check in voters with an internally built application; the dashboard, an internally built tool planned to be used to monitor Election Day activities; and wireless connectivity for SiteBooks using MoFi devices. Table 8.2, on the following page, provides a brief description of each issue; related Interim Report recommendations from IAD; BerryDunn’s observations; BerryDunn’s assessment; and BerryDunn’s short-term recommendations. Short-term recommendations are intended to be implemented before the General Election. Please note that some short-term recommendations that were informally communicated to the Office, and subsequently implemented, have not been listed in the short-term recommendation sections. Table 8.2: Technology Management Observations and Recommendations Technology Management Observations and Recommendations No. 8.2.1 Issue Description Ability to monitor Election Day activity Related Interim Report Recommendations Observations Develop and review real-time system reports showing SiteBook connectivity and other critical activities during the setup process and throughout the election. The Office reported that a dashboard application is in development that will be able to access information transmitted from SiteBooks, including identifying when a SiteBook is down and how long check-in takes. The Office reported that this tool would be able to be used to monitor SiteBooks the day before Election Day and on Election Day. Technical staff reported that the dashboard could be used to ensure all SiteBooks are online and to ensure all SiteBooks are locked at the end of the day Monday after setup is complete. Operational staff reported meeting with the application developer to define specific metrics and thresholds for the dashboard. BerryDunn observed a demonstration of the dashboard interface as of October 26, 2018. The dashboard includes a list of all polling places and vote centers, uses icons and colors to communicate statistics per hour, and automatically refreshes regularly. The dashboard icons measure the following metrics: line wait times, how many SiteBooks are on and how many are unlocked, number of workers signed in, and how many successful check-ins that included issuing a ballot have been completed on the SiteBook. The dashboard is sortable by each metric, and all of the voting sites are drillable to view more detail. Staff discussed the possibility of displaying the dashboard in the hotline room to be located in the MCTEC facility and assigning dedicated staff members to monitor the dashboard. These individuals would be responsible for reporting issues to decision-makers. The decision-makers could then make a Report of Observations and Recommendations Page 20 Technology Management Observations and Recommendations decision based on the issues and deploy resources as necessary. Staff discussed displaying multiple views of the dashboard to monitor different metrics. Assessment The dashboard will be a tool that can be used to measure and assess metrics in real time to determine if there are issues at any voting sites. BerryDunn observed discussion of how it will potentially be used and escalation paths, but specific plans were not defined and documented as of October 29, 2018. • Identify and document staff roles for monitoring the dashboard, as well as procedures for responding to dashboard alerts. (BerryDunn observed identification of roles and procedures, but did not observe documentation of these roles and procedures.) o BerryDunn Short-Term Recommendations • Use the dashboard to help ensure that setup and closeout are successfully executed. Consider development and utilization of a roll-call procedure, using the dashboard, to ascertain the status of all SiteBooks at 5:00 p.m. on Monday before Election Day. Ensure that an escalation plan is in place to address any outstanding setup issues after 5:00 p.m. (The Office reported it plans to implement these recommendations; BerryDunn did not observe implementation of these recommendations.) o No. 8.2.2 The dashboard appears to be a tool that can be used on Election Day to identify and address a number of issues. If roles are not clear, the dashboard functionality may not be used to its full potential. A properly developed and communicated escalation plan will permit resolution of SiteBook issues discovered during setup prior to the commencement of Election Day activities. Issue Description Reliability of SiteBook hardware, software, and wireless network connectivity to support Election Day voter sign-in and verification Related Interim Report Recommendations Observations Develop and review real-time system reports showing SiteBook connectivity and other critical activities during the setup process and throughout the election. Because some SiteBooks were packed for shipping before certain final updates were made to the SiteBook application, those SiteBooks will need to be updated when they are set up on Monday before Election Day. Technical staff reported that updates/patches to the SiteBook application will take minimal time and will not impede setup. Technical staff reported that issues due to SiteBooks not updating properly are rare. (Staff reported 12 out of 1,600 SiteBooks units experienced issues due to updates during the Primary Election.) Report of Observations and Recommendations Page 21 Technology Management Observations and Recommendations The Office reported that it purchased six connectivity-testing devices. The Office identified 21 polling sites that had experienced connectivity issues during the Primary Election, and reported that all of these sites have been tested for connectivity between the Primary Election and the General Election. The Office reported that only one site has moved since the Primary Election, and it has been tested for connectivity. The Office reported that the dashboard will be used both on the day before Election Day and Election Day to monitor SiteBooks, and will alert staff at the warehouse if one or multiple SiteBooks are not transmitting information. The role of the IT troubleshooter has been created to help troubleshoot technical issues and backfill the role that a third-party contractor fulfilled in providing technical support during the Primary Election. BerryDunn observed that board workers are trained to contact a troubleshooter if there are any issues, and the troubleshooter can call the hotline to deploy an IT troubleshooter if needed. Staff reported that IT troubleshooters will have some technical background and are required to attend a specific training “boot camp” related to elections equipment. Additionally, the Office reported that SiteBooks could be used off-line in a similar manner to a paper roster to sign in voters, so that voters can vote provisionally in the event of a connectivity outage. Assessment Based on information BerryDunn received, it does not appear that failure of SiteBook updates are a highrisk to impact Election Day activities. In addition, the plan to replace faulty SiteBooks in the event of technical problems appears practical given time and resource constraints. Although testing at all polling locations would be ideal, testing at priority sites only appears reasonable based on time and resource constraints prior to Election Day. Priority sites for connectivity testing include all locations that had connectivity issues during the Primary Election, and all locations where a MoFi will be placed at a different physical location from the Primary Election (e.g., use of a different room in the same building). BerryDunn has not verified whether connectivity testing has been conducted at any new physical locations where MoFi would be used as of October 29, 2018. • BerryDunn Short-Term Recommendations Ensure any MoFi devices that will be placed in a different location (at the polling place) during the General Election than they were during the Primary Election are tested at their new physical location. (The Office reported that this recommendation has been implemented; BerryDunn did not observe connectivity testing.) o Report of Observations and Recommendations Connectivity testing helps to mitigate the risk of connectivity issues that could disrupt activities on Election Day. Page 22 BerryDunn Report of Observations and Recommendations Page 23 8.3 Project Management BerryDunn identified and reviewed issues related to project management as a primary component of this assessment. BerryDunn observed meeting management and assessed documents used to manage the project, such as spreadsheets, reports, and emails. Table 8.3 provides a description of each issue; related Interim Report recommendations from IAD; BerryDunn’s observations; BerryDunn’s assessment; and BerryDunn’s short-term recommendations. Short-term recommendations are intended to be implemented before the General Election. Please note that some short-term recommendations that were informally communicated to the Office, and subsequently implemented, have not been listed in the short-term recommendation sections. Table 8.3: Project Management Observations and Recommendations Project Management Observations and Recommendations No. 8.3.1 Issue Description Effective project management of General Election activities Related Interim Report Recommendations Observations Ensure this new project leader has the resources, support, and ability to successfully plan and execute the General Election activities, while mitigating potential pitfalls. This includes ensuring collaborative communications and coordination of efforts between all persons involved to facilitate a successful Election Day. The Office utilizes an Excel spreadsheet that includes action items due and performance goals for each week, by category area, in order to track deadlines and measure progress. The areas include board worker recruitment, ballot processing, central recruitment, paper rosters, polling locations, training, troubleshooter recruitment, and warehouse. The elections project team members are each assigned specific areas and are responsible for managing that area. At their weekly management meetings, the elections project team discussed these items and tasks, and shared updates and progress on each item with the Director of Elections. Additionally, BerryDunn observed weekly meetings in which the elections project team shared updates with the Recorder. The Office reported holding discussions related to risk scenarios. The Office also reported discussing “lessons learned” throughout the project. BerryDunn obtained some of the documents that project team members used to track project tasks; for example, several Excel spreadsheets to track recruitment of various types of workers, and a screenshot of a database to track and report on recruitment of board workers. BerryDunn received the 2018 Election Communications Plan that defines four communication tiers, as well as their respective audiences; methods of communication; and timing of communication. Report of Observations and Recommendations Page 24 Project Management Observations and Recommendations Assessment The Office has a project manager and several staff members assigned to project tasks who use various tools to track completion of those tasks. Although project team members are each assigned a specific area, the task owner for each action item is not clearly documented in the spreadsheet. The tracking spreadsheet did not include task dependencies. While the Office describes processes for assessing risk and discussing lessons learned, the processes are not structured and documented. A documented communications plan is a useful project management tool that could help the project team communicate with various entities on Election Day. • Consider conducting structured tabletop sessions with all elections project team members to discuss several “what if” scenarios and walk through roles, responsibilities, and actions in each scenario. Based on these discussions, the team could determine any outstanding tasks and create a checklist of items to track the completion of these tasks. (BerryDunn did not observe implementation of this recommendation.) o BerryDunn Short-Term Recommendations • Ensure all project tasks have documented due dates, a task owner, and task dependencies. (BerryDunn observed implementation of due dates for tasks, but not documented task owners and dependencies.) o • Documenting roles and responsibilities, as well as due dates, ensures that all tasks are addressed and allows the team to evaluate project progress. Task dependencies help the team understand which tasks are the highest priority and highest risk, and prioritize tasks. Develop a “lessons learned” process that will be beneficial for future elections. (The Office reported it is compiling lessons learned; BerryDunn did not observe implementation of this recommendation.) o No. 8.3.2 Tabletop sessions would encourage project team members to consider scenarios and devote critical thought to solutions, resulting in strengthening crisis preparedness and uncovering unaddressed items. The project team can gain efficiencies, reduce project costs, and mitigate risks by learning from past projects, and implementing past successes while avoiding past failures. Issue Description Timely setup of polling locations Related Interim Report Recommendations Contact existing voting facilities to secure commitments. Report of Observations and Recommendations Page 25 Project Management Observations and Recommendations Office staff reported a plan to recruit a minimum of 225 workers (125 troubleshooters and 100 County employees) to set up SiteBooks on the Monday before Election Day, which indicates that each setup worker is responsible for the setup of two to three sites. The Office asked inspectors to indicate whether they were comfortable with SiteBook setup after viewing video instructions. For sites where the inspector indicated a lack of confidence in performing SiteBooks setup, that function will be completed by a troubleshooter or a County worker. Each troubleshooter and County worker will be responsible for up to two polling sites. The Office plans to have all polling locations set up between 8:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m. on the Monday before Election Day, except for the facilities that will allow setup prior to Monday and the facilities that cannot be set up during business hours, such as schools. The goal is to have most sites set up by 3:00 p.m. All inspectors, judges (backup inspectors), and troubleshooters are required to complete training that includes SiteBook setup. Observations The Office reported that in addition to primary responsibility for setting up two sites each, troubleshooters will monitor and support their three to four assigned sites for Election Day during setup, including the two assigned setup sites. The Office reported that the project team has obtained telephone numbers for afterhours staff at voting facilities, in case any need arises to address issues or setup after 5:00 p.m. In training observed by BerryDunn, trainers told the inspectors they would receive their roster of board workers on October 29, 2018, and should contact the facility and board workers to schedule a setup time. On November 3, 2018, the troubleshooter is expected to contact the inspector, who will be responsible for providing the setup time to the troubleshooter. BerryDunn reviewed a letter sent to polling place facilities, providing a calendar of events leading up to Election Day and notifying facilities that the opening time is 5:00 a.m. The letter also notified facilities that Monday, November 5, 2018, is the setup day, and that facilities should expect to be contacted by an inspector by Wednesday, October 31, 2018. The letter provides contact information for the facilities to use if the inspector does not call and schedule setup by October 31, 2018. Assessment BerryDunn Short-Term Recommendations The Office has taken action to mitigate logistical risks, including obtaining after-hours contact information. However, there was not a specific schedule in place for setup coordination. The Office reported that inspectors would receive board worker contact information on October 29, 2018, and then schedule setup with facilities by October 31, 2018. • Ensure a specific schedule is in place to organize logistics on the day before Election Day so that facility and setup staff are able to meet, access the facility, and set up all equipment. (The Office Report of Observations and Recommendations Page 26 Project Management Observations and Recommendations reported it plans to implement this recommendation; BerryDunn did not observe implementation of this recommendation.) o No. 8.3.3 Because logistics of site setup were reported as a potential cause of polling place issues during the Primary Election, confirming a specific schedule will give the project team assurance that workers and facility staff will be able to meet and access the facility in order to set up the equipment. Issue Description Minimization of voting line wait times Related Interim Report Recommendations Implement procedures to measure line wait times and voter check-in activity at individual voting locations throughout the day, and quickly redeploy resources as necessary. The Office is participating in a wait time study in cooperation with the Bipartisan Policy Center, which studies polling place wait times nationwide. The application developer reported that the SiteBook application was updated to include wait time tracking functionality. The planned procedure is as follows: o o o o Observations o The inspector will scan the wait time badge into the SiteBook at the top of every hour. If there is no line, the inspector will select “report no line” on the screen. If there is a line, the inspector will select “start timer,” and the marshal will hand the badge to the last person in line. The marshal will instruct the voter to give the badge to the board worker when the voter reaches check-in, and the worker will scan the badge into the SiteBook to record the time. If the line is longer than an hour, a second badge will be deployed. The dashboard will indicate whether there is a line or not at the time of the badge scan, and the length of the wait based on the hourly scan. The Office reported that the dashboard threshold indicators will be green if the wait time is less than 20 minutes, yellow for over 20 minutes, and red for over 30 minutes. The Office has discussed having a staff member designated to monitor the dashboard and escalate line wait-time issues to decision-makers. According to the Polling Place Wait Time Reduction Plan, available on the board worker training website and dated August 27, 2018, if there is a wait time longer than 30 minutes at any locations, inspectors or troubleshooters will work with Office staff to assess the reason for the issue. Depending upon the Report of Observations and Recommendations Page 27 Project Management Observations and Recommendations assessment, troubleshooters can deliver additional booths and/or SiteBook terminals, or IT troubleshooters can be deployed to provide technical assistance. The Office reported that “emergency kits” with extra SiteBooks are available to be deployed if necessary. In addition, the Office has implemented an outreach campaign using a third party to advertise the important deadlines related to the General Election, and information in both English and Spanish about phased opening of early vote centers. Throughout the campaign, the Office has encouraged voters to vote early in order to minimize the number of in-person voters on Election Day. Assessment The Office will be able to use technology to track line wait times in real time, which is valuable data that can be used to identify challenges and deploy resources on Election Day. The line wait time methodology will allow the Office to monitor line wait time once every hour, but not continually throughout the day; the Office reported that the reason for this is consistency with the other participants in the wait time study. As of October 29, 2018, the Wait Time Reduction Plan had not been updated to reflect the use of the SiteBook to measure wait time, and BerryDunn did not receive any documentation related to procedures for escalating thresholds. • BerryDunn Short-Term Recommendations Update and communicate a clear written procedure that identifies the thresholds for escalation (e.g., 30 minutes, 1 hour) and exact procedures for mitigation. (BerryDunn observed identification of wait time thresholds for the dashboard, but did not observe implementation of threshold and mitigation procedure documentation.) o Report of Observations and Recommendations Workers and those monitoring the dashboard need to know specific actions to take as long wait times are identified, and if there are procedures for escalating thresholds. Page 28 9. FUTURE ELECTION RECOMMENDATIONS FOR IMPROVEMENT BerryDunn recognizes that certain recommendations developed during this engagement cannot be implemented before November 6, 2018, due to time and resource constraints related to planning for the General Election during this period. In this section, BerryDunn provides recommendations for implementation after November 6, 2018, to help the Office ensure successful planning and execution of future election activities and mitigate the issues identified during the Primary Election. BerryDunn’s recommendations are based on the Firm’s observations and understanding gained pursuant to the scope of this assessment. BerryDunn observed opportunities for improvement in the structure, documentation, and communication of project management activities for elections. Structured project management methods and tools will help the project team increase productivity and quality of work, communicate with project stakeholders, mitigate risks, and track and communicate the progress of the project. Once these methods and tools are initially created, they can be customized and reused for each election project. BerryDunn recommends that the Office consider implementing the following recommendations related to project management: Recommendation 1: Develop a Work Structure Breakdown (WSB) The WSB should include all election tasks, such as deliverables and milestones, from planning through completion of an election. Each task should have target start and end dates, task owner, assigned resources, and task dependencies when applicable. Each task should be owned by a task owner, but the project manager should continually monitor the progress of each task and have a grasp of overall progress of election activities at any point of time. BerryDunn recommends the Office create a template of WSBs that includes most commonly required tasks for elections and can be customized for each type of election. Best practices related to this recommendation: • Create and maintain a project schedule that documents due dates, task owners, and task dependencies. BerryDunn recommends consideration of project management software to create and maintain a project schedule. • Identify and document in detail project stakeholder roles and responsibilities, including those for the project manager, the project management team, the technical team, the executive leadership team, and other identified project stakeholders. • Conduct knowledge transfer sessions to ensure that each task owner has one or more backup staff member. • Confirm all tasks with pre-task emails, and require follow-up emails to confirm that tasks have been completed or to report any challenges or issues with completing tasks. Report of Observations and Recommendations Page 29 Recommendation 2: Create a central repository of election-related documents, including staffing plan/schedule, training schedules and materials, communication, and procedures. These documents should be continually updated by project team members. This will help ensure all project team members, including management, have access to the same latest version of documents. BerryDunn understands that the recruitment and hiring processes vary for each type of election workers, and need to be managed separately. However, based on the Firm’s observations, BerryDunn believes that the Office will significantly benefit from creating a master staffing plan/schedule in which all recruitment efforts are compiled. Best practices related to this recommendation: • Create written procedures, starting with the most critical processes, to ensure other staff can follow the procedures in case of emergency. • Document elections policies and procedures, and update as processes change. For example, because the dashboard is being used for the first time in the General Election, create procedures, user guides, and training to describe the use of the dashboard. • Document a project communication strategy that includes communication type, delivery method, frequency, owner, and audience for the communication. • For every meeting, create a simple meeting agenda that includes topics to be discussed and any decisions to be made. Create summary meeting minutes that include attendance, key points discussed, decisions made, risks identified, issues resolved, and action items and owners. • Conduct a risk identification exercise with project stakeholders to identify any existing or potential risks and issues. A list of lessons-learned from the previous election may be a good place to start. Identifying risks at the beginning of the project will allow for continuity in the mitigation strategies for transferable issues and risks, and set the project up for success in proactively identifying potential challenges and associated mitigation strategies. Report of Observations and Recommendations Page 30 EXHIBIT (November 10, 2018 public records request to Recorder?s Of?ce) November 10, 2018 VIA MAIL AND EMAIL Talia Offord Colleen Connor Maricopa County Recorder 111 South 3rd Avenue, #103 Phoenix, Arizona 85003 voterinfo@risc.maricopa.gov Re: Public Records Request Dear Ms. Offord and Connor: As you are aware from my previous correspondence, this office represents the Arizona Republican Party regarding the November 6, 2018 general election. I am writing on behalf of the Arizona Republican Party to request production of public records under the control of the Maricopa County Recorder’s Office for non-commercial purposes. This request is made pursuant to Arizona’s Public Record law, codified at Ariz. Rev. Stat. §§ 39-121 et seq. For purposes of this request, the following terms shall apply: 1. “Recorder’s Office Personnel” shall include any individual employed by, representing, or otherwise affiliated with the Maricopa County Recorder’s Office. 2. “The Democratic Party” shall include any individual employed by, representing, or otherwise affiliated with the Democratic Party, including but not necessarily limited to, The Arizona Democratic Party, The Maricopa County Democratic Party, and/or the National Democratic Party. 3. “Recorder Fontes” shall include Maricopa County Recorder Adrian Fontes, as well as any agent, representative, employee, and/or spokesperson of Recorder Fontes. 4. “George Soros” shall include George Soros, as well as any agent, representative, employee, and/or spokesperson of George Soros. 5. “Tom Steyer” shall include Tom Steyer, as well as any agent, representative, employee, and/or spokesperson of Tom Steyer, NextGen, NextGen America, and/or Clean Energy for a Healthy Arizona. We hereby request access to the following information: 649 North Fourth Avenue Phoenix, Arizona 85003 www.statecraftlaw.com Public Records Request November 10, 2018 1. Any and all correspondence, e-mails, memoranda, notes, text messages, or voicemail documents created, sent, or received by Recorder Fontes and/or Recorder’s Office Personnel since November 1, 2017, referencing or mentioning the time period within which voters will be permitted to verify signatures on their early ballot affidavit envelope. 2. Any and all correspondence, e-mails, memoranda, notes, text messages, voicemail documents, and/or calendar entries reflecting or referring to communications between or among Recorder Fontes and/or The Democratic Party, specifically including but not limited to any emails between Recorder Fontes and/or Recorder’s Office Personnel and any email address ending in “@dnc.org”, “@dscc.org”, “@perkinscoie.com”, “@cblaywers.com”, and/or “@kyrstensinema.com”. 3. Any and all correspondence, e-mails, memoranda, notes, text messages, or voicemail documents created, sent, or received by Recorder Fontes since November 1, 2017 mentioning or referencing emergency voting centers. 4. Any and all correspondence, e-mails, memoranda, notes, text messages, voicemail documents and/or calendar entries exchanged between Recorder Fontes’ personal account(s) and/or devices and Recorder Fontes’ government accounts and/or devices account since January 3, 2017. 5. Any and all correspondence, e-mails, memoranda, notes, text messages, voicemail documents, and/or calendar entries created, sent, or received by Recorder Fontes and/or Recorder’s Office Personnel mentioning or referring to Tom Steyer and/or George Soros. 6. Any and all correspondence, e-mails, memoranda, notes, text messages, voicemail documents, and/or calendar entries reflecting any communications between Recorder Fontes and/or Recorder’s Office Personnel on the one hand, and Tom Steyer and/or George Soros on the other. In the event that one or more items are deemed confidential, we request that any confidential material be redacted and the remainder of the item be provided. Although a non-commercial request, we will pay all reasonable copying expenses up to $500 in the event the Maricopa County Recorder’s Office does consider this request to be commercial to expedite the request. In the event the cost will exceed this amount, please contact me. We respectfully request that you please produce the documents responsive to this request on a rolling basis beginning Monday, November 12, 2018, at a location that is convenient for your office. We appreciate your attention to this matter. If you have any questions, please contact me at (602) 382-6312. Thank you. /s/ Kory Langhofer Kory Langhofer CC: Talia Offord (offordt@mcao.maricopa.gov) Colleen Connor (connorc@mcao.maricopa.gov) 2 EXHIBIT (December 17 2018 public records request to Recorder?s Of?ce) MARICOPA COUNTY RECORDER NON-COMMERCIAL PURPOSE Public Record Request Request is hereby made to El inspect or ?reproduce the following public record(s): (Indicate document name, page numbers, address and permit number where applicable. Arm}: 8?5 Sheer Knead?) sec 3+ A a! r. H'cr? cast a Pursuant to A.R.S. the record(s) are requested for the following purpose; Pfce-u 5th: ail-Porcth icl?l'cr. and the recotd(s} (check one) the purpose of sale or resale or for the purpose of producing a document containing all or part of the copy, printout or photograph for sale or the obtaining of names and addresses from such public record for the purpose i of solicitation or the sale of such names and addresses to another for the purpose of solicitation or for any purpose in which the purchaser can reasonably anticipate the receipt of monetary gain from the direct or indirect use of such public records.? Will not be used for a commercial purpose: Commercial Purpose is de?ned as: ?the use of a public record for Will be used for the Following commercial purpose (certi?ed statement meeting requirements listed below must accompany application. Use Commercial Purpose Record Request Form): I certify that all information provided is true and correct under penalty of perjury. I agree to pay the fee or deposit of 370? for these records. I agree not to hold Marieopa County liable for any inaccurate or incomplete information 1 may /Zf?/aof? Applicd?t Signature Date Contact Information [please grind: Name: 5 ?tdhn?" Address;? Phone #:_Email Address: A person who obtains public records for a commercial purpose without indicating the commercial purpose or who obtains a public record for a nonconunercial purpose and uses or knowingly allows the uses of such public record for a commercial purpose or who obtains a public record for a commercial purpose and uses or knowingly allows the use of such public record for a different commercial purpose or who obtains a public record from anyone other than the custodian of such records and uses them for a commercial purpose shall in addition to other penalties be liable to the state or the political subdivision from which the public record was obtained for damages in the amount of three times the amount which would have been charged for the public record had the commercial purpose been stated plus costs and reasonable attomeys? fees or shall be liable to the state or the political subdivision for the amount of three times the actual damages if it can be shown that the public record would not have been provided had the commercial purpose of actual use been stated at the time of obtaining the recordsRequester understands and agrees that Maricopa County does not guarantee the accuracy of the data and information requested and hereby expressly disclaims any responsibility for the truth, lack of truth, validity, invalidity, accuracy, inaccuracy of any said data and information. Requesterl'Purchaser accepts responsibility for RequesterlPurchaser?s unauthorized use or transmission of any such data or information in its actual or altered form. hectic You. December 17, 2018 Ste hen Richer VIA MAIL AND EMAIL Talia Offord Colleen Connor Maricopa County Recorder 111 South 3rd Avenue, #103 Phoenix, Arizona 85003 voterinfo?lrisemaricopa. gov Re: Public Records Request Dear Ms. Offord and Ms. Connor: The Arizona Republican Party and Chairman Jonathan Lines have asked me to conduct a review of certain practices and procedures in Maricopa County in the recent 2018 general election. As part of this review?which is non-commercial in requesting certain public records from the Maricopa County Recorder. This request is intended to supplement, not replace, the request made on November 10, 2018 by the Arizona Republican Party through its counsel Kory Langhofer cf Statecraft PLLC. This request is made pursuant to Arizona?s Public Record law, codi?ed at Ariz. Rev. Stat. 39-12] et seq. I have also attached a completed ?Non Commercial Public Record Request? form that is consistent with this letter. I understand that some of these requests may take longer than others. I would greatly,r appreciate it if you could send me the records as they become available rather than waiting for the completion of all of the below-listed record requests. I will also send additional requests in forthcoming letters. I know it?s the holiday season, and 1 know your of?ce has worked very hard to get through the recent election cycle. I apologize for adding to your workload at this time, but I greatlyr appreciate your attention to these requests. [cont] De?nitions: In ?Elections Division? means the personnel and operations overseeing elections, the head of which division is the Director of Elections; ?Internal? means between employees or af?liates of the Of?ce; 0 ?Of?ce? means the Maricopa County Recorder?s Of?ce; Requests: 1. A copy of any organizational chart of the Of?ce that includes the names of the employees occupying the different roles. The organizational chart provided on the Recorder?s website provides only the titles of the positions.1 2. A copy of a list of all employees in the Elections Division together with any available information describing the responsibilities of the different employees. 3. Copies of all Internal e-mails, memorandums, notes, or other written documents regarding the Office?s decision to open Emergency Voting Centers on Saturday, November 3 and Monday, November 5, 2018. 4. Copies of all Internal e-mails, memorandums, notes, or other written documents regarding the decision of where to locate the Emergency Voting Centers on Saturday, November 3 and Monday, November 5, 2018. 5. Copies of all e-mails or other correspondence written by the Recorder, the Deputy Recorder, or any employee in the Elections Division to persons outside the Of?ce regarding the decision to open Emergency Voting Centers andfor the location or hours of the Emergency Voting Centers. 6. Copies of all e-mails or other correspondence between July 1, 2017 and July 1, 2018 between Jennifer Marson or other personnel at the Arizona Association of Counties and the Recorder, the Deputy Recorder, or any employee in the Elections Division regarding early voting, emergency voting, weekend voting, HB 2206, or SB 1466. [cont] 1 The document titted "New Organizational Design: Effective 5 February 201?? is available at: 7. Copies of all text messages sent in November 2018 between the Recorder, the Deputy Recorder, or any employee in the Elections Division and any of the following Arizona attorneys: Roopali Desai, Keith Beauchamp, Scott Bennett, Kent Brockelman, Jill Chasson, Sam Coppersmith, Katherine Hyde, John Devvulf, Kimberly Fatica, Andy Gaona, Andy Gordon, John Kelly, Karen Owens, Vidula Patki, Kristen Rosati, Marvin Ruth, Melissa Soliz, Kathy Steadman, Shelley Tolman or other members of the law ?rm Coppersmith Broekelman. 8. Copies of all complaintsfissues submitted by voters during the general election. Thank you, gap/av Sep hen Richer Attached: Maricopa County Recorder Non-Commercial Purpose Public Record Request Form EXHIBIT (January 1, 2019 public records request to Recorder?s Of?ce) MARICOPA COUNTY RECORDER NON-COMMERCIAL PURPOSE Public Record Request Request is hereby made to El inspect or "CF-reproduce the following public rccord(s): (indicate document name, page numbers. address a permit number where applicable. Attach 8.5 sheet needed.) A gee attache ieh'i'cC . Pursuant to A.R.S. ?39-121.03, the record(s) are requested for the following purpose: (at AH?erber ch?rt'" and the record(s) {check one) Will not be used for a commercial purpose: Commercial Purpose is de?ned as: ?the use of a public record for the purpose of sale or resale or for the purpose of producing a document containing all or part of the copy, printout or photograph for sale or the obtaining of names and addresses from such public record for the purpose of solicitation or the sale of such names and addresses to another for the purpose of solicitation or for any purpose in which the purchaser can reasonably anticipate the receipt of monetary gain from the direct or indirect use of such public records." El Will be used for the following commercial purpose (certi?ed statement meeting requirements listed below must accompany application. Use Commercial Purpose Record Request Form): I certify that all information provided is true and correct under penalty of perjury. I agree to pay the fee or deposit of 500 for these records. I agree not to hold Maricopa County liable for any inaccurate or incomplete information I mayrecewegh?k?f i/ Applicant Signature Date Contact Informatioypfeese print}: Name: gin-(db: at. 121A. Address: Phone it: Email Address: i u- A person who obtains public records for a commercial purpose without indicating the commercial purpose or who obtains a public record for a noncommercial purpose and uses or knowingly allows the uses of such public record for a commercial purpose or who obtains apublic record for a commercial purpose and uses or lmowingly allows the use of such public record for a different commercial purpose or who obtains a public record from anyone other than the custodian of such records and uses them for a commercial purpose shall in addition to other penalties be liable to the state or the political subdivision From which the public record was obtained for damages in the amount of three times the amount which would have been charged for the public record had the commercial purpose been stated plus costs and reasonable attorneys? fees or shall be liable to the state or the political subdivision for the amount of three times the actual damages if it can be shown that the public record would not have been provided had the commercial purpose of actual use been stated at the time of obtaining the recordsRequester understands and agrees that Maricopa County does not guarantee the accuracy of the data and information requested and hereby expressly disclaims any responsibility for the truth, lack of truth, validity, invalidity, accuracy, inaccuracy of any said data and information. RequestcrIPurchaser accepts responsibility for Requestert'Purchaser?s unauthorized use or transmission of any such data or information in its actual or altered {Lamk' You January 1, 2019 Stephen Richer VIA MAIL AN EMAIL Talia Offord Colleen Connor Maricopa County Recorder 111 South 3rd Avenue, #103 Phoenix, Arizona 85003 voterinfo@.risc.maricona.aov Re: Public Records Request Dear Ms. Offord and Ms. Connor: Happy New Year! The Arizona Republican Party and Chairman Jonathan Lines have asked me to conduct a review of certain practices and procedures in Maricopa County in the recent 2018 general election. As part of this review?which is non-commercial in purpose?I?m requesting certain public records from the Maricopa County Recorder. This request is intended to supplement, not replace, the request I made dated December 2018 and the request made on November 10, 2013 by the Arizona Republican Party through its counsel Kory Langhofer of Statecraft PLLC. This request is made pursuant to Arizona?s Public Record law, codi?ed at Aria. Rev. Stat. 39-121 at seq. I have also attached a completed ?Non Commercial Public Record Request? form that is consistent with this letter. I understand that some of these requests may take longer than others. I would greatly appreciate it if you could send me the records as they become available rather than waiting for the completion of all of the below-listed record requests. I will also send additional requests in forthcoming letters. I know it?s the holiday season, and I know your of?ce has worked very hard to get through the recent election cycle. I apologize for adding to your workload at this time, but I greatly appreciate your attention to these requests. Best wishes and health to the We of you and your Of?ce for 2019. [cont] De?nitions: I- ?Elections Division? means the personnel and operations overseeing elections, the head of which division is the Director of Elections; I ?Internal? means between employees or af?liates of the Of?ce; I ?Of?ce? means the Maricopa County Recorder?s Of?ce; Requests: 1. A copy of all audits and reviews produced by the Of?ce or produced by an outside organization and shared with the Of?ce regarding the perceived dif?culties and failures with the August 2018 primary election. 2. A copy of all Internal memorandums and reports assessing the cause, duration, and location of the software failure that caused a temporary cessation of voting in the middle of the day on Election Day, November 6, 2018. 3. The number of Federal Only ballots cast in the November 2018 general election in Maricopa County. 4. Copies of all signage that the Of?ce displayed at the emergency voting sites (sites open on Saturday, November 3, 2018 and Monday, November 5, 2018) to inform voters that the sites were for emergency voting purposes. 5. Copies of any records, notes, decisions, or corrective actions with respect to voter Ted Butler?s reported incident at Gloria Dei Church (3539 East Stanford Drive) on Voting Day. 6. Copies of all information available regarding the votes cast on the emergency voting days (Saturday, November 3, 2018 and Monday, November 5, 2018). Particularly records relating to the number of votes cast on those two days and the aggregate partisan affiliations of the votes cast on those two days. Thank you, ?r?whm?vv Stephen Richer Attached: Maricopa County Recorder Non-Commercial Purpose Public Record Request Form 1/24/2019 Gmail - Records Requests. Records Requests. Stephen Richer To: Donna Kish - RISCX Fri, Jan 18, 2019 at 6:38 PM Dear Ms. Kish, I hope you are doing well. I'm writing to see if your office has made progress on the following records requests: November 10, 2018. Made by the law firm Statecraft (attorney Kory Langhofer) on behalf of the Arizona Republican Party December 17, 2018. The first request I made January 1, 2019. The second request I made As I noted in my letters, even if you have not collected the responsive documents for all of the requests, I'd greatly appreciate it if you could send the documents for the items you have completed. Thank you. I hope you have a great weekend and a meaningful MLK day. Stephen https://mail.google.com/mail/u/0?ik=6f6c46937b&view=pt&search=all&permmsgid=msg-a%3Ar-4930136890739684801&simpl=msg-a%3Ar-49301368… 1/1 EXHIBIT (Requests for interview sent to Recorder Fontes) 1/24/2019 Gmail - Arizona Republican Party election review Arizona Republican Party election review Stephen Richer To: afontes@mail.maricopa.gov Mon, Jan 14, 2019 at 9:03 AM Dear Recorder Fontes, I'm a local attorney, and I have been asked by the Arizona Republican Party and Chairman Jonathan Lines to conduct a review of certain practices and actions of your Office in this past general election. Might you be willing to answer a few questions pursuant to my review? I can e-mail you the questions, meet in person this week to ask my questions, or call you on the phone this week -- whichever is most convenient for you. Thank you for letting me know, and thank you in advance for your time. Stephen https://mail.google.com/mail/u/0?ik=6f6c46937b&view=pt&search=all&permmsgid=msg-a%3Ar5722353826398956280&simpl=msg-a%3Ar572235382… 1/1 1/24/2019 Gmail - Arizona Republican Party election review Arizona Republican Party election review Stephen Richer < To: afontes@mail.maricopa.gov > Fri, Jan 18, 2019 at 6:30 PM Dear Recorder Fontes, Circling back on this to see when you are available to discuss this topic or if you would prefer I email you questions directly. I greatly appreciate your time. I hope you have a great weekend and a meaningful MLK day. Stephen [Quoted text hidden] https://mail.google.com/mail/u/0?ik=6f6c46937b&view=pt&search=all&permmsgid=msg-a%3Ar-2703221455119101454&simpl=msg-a%3Ar-27032214… 1/1 EXHIBIT (Documents produced by Arizona Senate in response to public records request) 1/24/2019 Gmail - Responsive documents for your Public Records Request of 12/18/18 Responsive documents for your Public Records Request of 12/18/18 Norm Moore To: "stephen.richer@gmail.com" Wed, Jan 9, 2019 at 10:35 AM Dear Mr. Richer, After a careful and thorough examination of documents processed and reviewed pursuant to your Public Records Request of December 18, 2018, there are 69 pages of responsive documents attached to this email. Pursuant to a telephone conversation with you on Tuesday, December 18, 2018 after I had received your initial emailed request early that morning, we agreed to a change in the dates of the original search date parameters from December 1, 2017 to November 30, 2018 to January 1, 2018 to July 1, 2018. Additionally, the emails to and from “The offices of the above-named senators” was refined to include the Administrative Assistants for each of the respective Senators specified in the request and the respective policy advisors for those Senators. The search queried documents included all those individuals specified in your request and the following Senate staff related to the “offices of the above-named Senators”: Marsha Hood and Sylvia Oliver, Administrative Assistants to Senator Yarbrough; Maria Moroyoqui, Administrative Assistant to Senator Quezada, J.T. Hunsaker, former Administrative Assistant to Senator Gray; Lisette Flores, General Counsel and Policy Advisor to the Minority (Democratic Staff for the Senate Judiciary Committee); and Garth Kamp, Senior Policy Advisor to the Majority (Republican Staff for the Senate Judiciary Committee). There were no responsive documents for either of the Administrative Assistants to Senator Yarbrough and the former Administrative Assistant to Senator Gray. There was one responsive document from the Administrative Assistant to Senator Quezada. The responsive documents relating to Senator Gray do include some legislative privileged communications. However, Senator Gray waived his privilege for most of those documents but chose not to waive his privilege for a few documents and those are not disclosed. If you have any questions or need further clarification please contact me at your convenience. Sincerely, Norm Moore Arizona State Senate Public Records Attorney (602) 926-5377 Stephen Richer - PRR - 121818 - 69 pages of responsive documents - 1819.pdf 2816K https://mail.google.com/mail/u/0?ik=6f6c46937b&view=pt&search=all&permmsgid=msg-f%3A1622205126351616182&simpl=msg-f%3A16222051263… 1/1 Norm Moore From: Martin Quezada Sent: Thursday. March 1. 2018 3:46 PM To: Leslie Hoffman Subject: RE: $81466 Thanks. I?m glad you were able to produce a floor amendment that works for everyone. I'll keep an out for it. MD. From: Leslie Hoffman Sent: Thursday, March 1, 2013 3:43 PM To: Martin Quezada Subject: $31466 Senator Quezada, was at the Capitol last week and spoke in committee on Senate Bill 1466. As requested by the committee we met with all of the stakeholders and have produced a vervr good ?oor amendment blending language In 531466 and HBZZOG. The flooramendment will be presented as 531466. I?ve yet to hear when this will go to the floor, however when it is offered l'm asking for your support. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me. Thank you so much for all you Leslie/M. Ho?mw Leslie.hoffman@vavanai.us Yava pai County Recorder 1015 Fair 5t. Prescott, AZ 85305 928-??1?3244 Norm Moore From: Lisette Flores Sent: Thursdayr February 15, 2018 10:45 AM To: Martin Quezada; Andrea Dalessandro; Lupe Contreras; Leonela Urrutia Subject: 531466 In addition to all the county recorders, and Maricopa County Recorders Office, an additional 15 individuals. and League of Women Voters have signed in opposed. Norm Moore From: Martin Quezada Sent: Thursday, February 15, 2013 10:23 AM To: Lisette Flores Subject: RE: H32206 passed in the House this morning - recorders are in support of this bill, which addresses early voting centers. I really don?t like Matt Morales. From: Lisette Flores sent: Thursday,r February,l 15, 2013 10:22 AM To: Martin Quezada Andrea Dalessandro Lupe Contreras Leonela Urrutia Subject: passed in the House this morning recorders are in support of this bill, which addresses earlyr voting centers. Norm Moore From: Maria Moroyoqui Sent: Tuesday, February 13, 2013 3:21 AM To: 'Jen Marson' Subject: RE: Request wf Sen Quezada - re: 531466 Hello Jen, My apologies but I have no record of your email. This has been happening lately with other staff, I?ll have to get a hold of computer services. Regarding your meeting request, I haye confirmed for you to meet with Sen. Quezada on Wednesday, February 14?? at 3:00 pm. Also, Lisette Flores will be joining in the meeting. Respectfully, Maria Jesus V. Moroyoqui Assistant to Senator Martin J. Quezede, Democratic Whip Legislatiye District 29 1700 W. Washington Phoenix. AZ 35007 Phone: 602.926.5911 Email: mmoroyoqui@azleg.goy From:len Marson Sent: Monday, February 12, 2018 5:28 PM To: Maria Moroyoqui Subject: Fwd: Request w! Sen Quezada - re: 5315,66 Hi Maria: I sent the email you requested last Friday (see below}. And you are correct the meeting time requested was 3:00 on Wednesday Feb 14. Please let me know if this date/time is con?rmed. Thank you, Jen Marson Sent from Jen's iPhone, likely with Siri- please excuse any types or unexpected brevity. 1 no longer check/respond to texts or emails while driying. Begin forwarded message: From:Jen Marson s'marson azcountiesor Date: February 3, 2013 at 11:02:05 AM EST To: "mmoroyoguiQazleggoy" Subject: Request w} Sen Quezada - re: 531466 Good morning - thank you for speaking with me today. I would like to meet with Senator Quezada to discuss our opposition to a bill that will be on the Senate Judiciary agenda next week (2/1 831466 removes some of the election decision making from the County Recorder and instead gives it to the Board of Supervisors. Thank you for getting me on his calendar and please let me know if you have any questions. Jen Jen Marson Executive Director Arizona Association of Counties 1910 W. Jefferson Street Phoenix, AZ 85009 602 252 6563 222 602 254 0969 till I This entail,r and any ?les transmitted with it, is the property of the Arizona Association of Counties and, unless indioated otherwise, is Intended only for the individual or entity addressed. This email mayr contain information considered privileged or confidential and legally exempt from disclosure. If the reader is not the intended recipient. or the recipient's authorised agent, you are hereby advised that copying or dissemination at this camunication is prohibited. it you have received this email in error, please notify the sender immediately. Norm Moore From: Jen Marson wrote: From yesterday?s republican Wm ?uervisors JUD Sponsored by: Gray Presented by: Vicente Reyna Decision: CONCUR Senator Gray: Just so all of our members know, this is probably going to be contentious because they didn?t' get everything they wanted. I talked to house leadership and they had some concems about the legalities of the weekend voting and disen?'anchising voters. The only thing that was removed was the weekend, the whole three days before the voting, which we never had before. So, we are not taking away any voter previous rights, we are just not granting more. Also for voting centers to be used as a ballot replacement location, we never had that before, we basically had a centralized location that they had to pick up their ballot and that is the same. They may be unhappy with that, but we are not regressing at all, we are leaving that the same. Also, a lot of this is clarifying the early voting centers are still under the authority of the board of supervisors. There may be some angst saying we are disen??anchising voters, but I will give you one example in our district for CD 8. Ponies was going to reduce number of voting centers in sun city. The average age is around the late 705. We've got people in the southern city that will not cross Grand Ave and come up to the central part of Sun City because they are uncertain about their physical capabilities. They were going to reduce number of voting centers to 1 in sun city, that would drastically disen?'anchise voters. Fortunately, our supervisor worked to make sure we had those, but the board of supervisors has the responsibility and oversight of the election process. The recorder would bring their plan and present that and okay that, but they still have the oversight. What we have done in the bill is make sure it is clari?ed in statute, so there is no uncertainty, that the early voting centers are under the board of supervisors. That de?nitely needs to be clari?ed. We never had voting locations open all weekend long, and never had a place that you can go anywhere and get a new ballot because you swear you didn't have a good ballot. Nothing in this amendment disenfranchises or roduces any voter rights from what we currently have. My concern is because they didn't get everything they wanted, I guess they don't appreciate the word compromise, we also removed a lot archaic language for things that just don't apply. You probably got the email ?'om Jen Larsen saying they are not happy with it and I asked her if should would rather have the bill die, even though we have made these improvements, and she said "yeah." I don't think that is a good way to proceed just on a policy basis. On a policy basis we improved things, we articulated the board is over the early voting centers and the recorders have to bring the plan. On the emergencies too, that is clari?ed that if they have an emergency they just have to have the board approval. When you are the board of supervisors, you are paid for all of this so if we were to go around them, we would in essence say you have to be ?nancially responsible for what the elected of?cial does and they don't have to get your okay and they can do whatever they want, and that is not good business. Again, the only thing we've done is clarify as we are moving forward, and not giving them as much new language as what they wanted, but we are not disenfranchising the voters. So, I need your support. From: Jen Marson Sent: Monday, April 23, 2013 1:29 PM Tu: Lisette Flores Sublect: Re: 1466 He?s concurring. We're apposed Sent from Jen?s iPhune, likely with Siri- please excuse any typos or unexpected brevity. I no longer checkfrespond tn texts or emails while driving. On Apr 23, 2018, at 11:41 AM, Lisette Flores wrote: Any new updates to share? Norm Moore From: Marilyn Rodriguez wrote: However I can be helpful! On Fri, Apr 20, 2013 at 1:47 PM Lisette Flores sLFiorngazleggow wrote: Thanks, Marilyn. I was cc?d on it but l?m grateful for you having my back. Lisette From: Marilyn Rodriguez Sent: Friday, April 20, 2018 1:12 PM To: Lisette Flores Sent: Friday, April 20, 2013 1:5? PM To: Lisette Flores Subject: RE: $31466 - No More Consensus County Recorders Are Opposed Yes. They do not have a formal positon change because their Board was meeting during House floor yesterday and they didn't know about the amendment at that time. However, this is the message that CSA staff sent to Supervisors earlier today: Good Afternoon Supervisors, had their LPC meeting this morning and all 15 County Recorders voted to oppose the House version of the bill due to the amendment added yesterday. Please ?nd the attached the opposition email sent by to the Senate this afternoon. Many of you updated your position in the HTS from opposed to support when moved to support the bill. Due to the changes that were made to the bill yesterday {which are detailed below), you may want to consider either removing or updating your position in the RTS system. If you need assistance using the HTS system, please either call or email me. From: Lisette Flores Sent: Friday, April 20, 2018 1:49 PM To: Jen Marson Subject: RE: 531466 - No More Consensus County Reoorders Are Opposed ls also getting involved in discussion with members? From: Jen Marson Sent: Friday, April 20, 2013 1:03 PM Cc: Trey Williams Megan Kintner cmkintner??vazcountiesome; Intern Subject: $81466 - No More Consensus County Recorders Are Opposed Importance: High ?it may be that Sen. Gray refuses the House amendments and takes this bill to Conference, but i cannot get that confirmed and knowing there is iimited time left, i?m working on the premise that 531466 not go to onference? Dear Members of the Senate: Many weeks ago the Senate Judiciary Committee heard $31466 - the bill being pushed by the Maricopa County Republican Party that would have given sole authority to the Board of Supervisors to establish early voting locations. It was a contentious hearing because all 15 County Recorders were opposed and when voting the committee made it clear that the proponents needed to work with counties moving forward. That process was successful and an agreement was reached that resulted in the Senate Engrossed Version which passed your chamber 29-0. The Arizona Association of Counties, and the County Recorders are once again opposed to 531466 because of the House floor amendment that was added. - - 1 - 1 entan cou lies werent .Countiesareacrucial stakeholders on election issues and we not En . 1 This email, and any' files transmitted with it, is the property of the Arizona Association at Counties and, unless indicated otherwise, is intended onlyr for the individual or entity addremd. This email ma}.f contain information considered privileged or confidential and legally exempt from disclosure. If the reader is not the intended recipient, or the recipient's authorized agent, you are tourismF advised Ihot copying or dissemination of this communication is prohibited. If you have received this email in Is-rrorIr please notify the Sender immediately. Norm Moore From: Lisette Flores Sent: Friday, April 20, 2013 1:43 PM To: 'Jen Marson' Subject: RE: 531466 - No More Consensus County Recorders Are Opposed I?m hearing Grey will concur. From: Jen Marson Sent: Friday, April 20, 2018 1:03 PM Cc: Trey Williams Subject: $31466 - No More Consensus County Recorders Are Opposed Importance: High IMilt may be that Sen. Gray refuses the House amendments and takes this bill to Conference, but i cannot get that confirmed and knowing there is limited time i'et't.r l'm working on the premise that 466 will not go to Conference? Dear Members of the Senate: Many weeks ago the Senate Judiciary Committee heard 531466 the bill being pushed by the Maricopo County Republican Party that would have given sole au?'lority to the Board of Supervisors to establish early voting locations. It was a contentious hearing because all 15 County Recorders were opposed and when voting the committee made it clear that the proponents needed to work with counties moving forward. That process was successful and an agreement was reached that resulted in the Senate Engrossed Version which passed your chamber 29-0. The Arizona Association of Counties, and the County Recorders are once again opposed to 531466 because of the House floor amendment that was addeddra?in ofth nwlanua .Countiesarea crucial stakeholders on election issues and enate 111 a The House floor amendment (our concerns are noted blue): 1. Removes the ability for weekend voting if the county has the technology to adequately update signature rosters I Why would election experts offer LESS access to voting if the technology is there to provide more access? 0 Counties have heard complaints from members of both parties that getting to a polling place on a weekday is a challenge this would allow them to come in on the weekend 2. Removes the ability for a vote center to be used as a ballot replacement location 0 Voters are legally entitled to a replacement ballot it something happens to the originalyr if a vote center is in place that seems like a logical place to distribute replacement ballots 3. Removes the ability for there to be more than one ballot replacement site per district 0 Current language says only one replacement location ?per district". The term ?district? does not apply to a vote center environment and that is why counties suggested changes to this section so that replacement ballot language works in a polling place and a vote center environment 0 More than one location for a replacement ballot helps voters by providing more access 4. Requires that Recorder can only modify the approved list of early voting locations if an "actual" emergency exists AND those emergency modi?cations can only occur on Election Day or the weekend prior to Election day It The sentence was altered in such a way that Recorders can only make changes in that 4-day window so what happens if an emergency occurs a week before the election? Two weeks before? 0 The word "actual" was not defined. It reads as though it means a natural emergency fire/ flood if that is not the intent then: i. Why add the word "actual"? ii. Does this allow counties to use flexibility in determining what is an emergency? 5. Gives full control to the 305 to determine types of voting and voting locations I This flies in the face of the compromise that counties and the Maricopa County Republican Party agreed to in the Senate I Existing statute gives the Recorder complete control yet MG.) and the County Recorders agreed to work "in conlunctian? with the 505 per the negotiations I This turns complete control over to the 805 who have no expertise in election administration For the reasons noted above we request your opposition to $31466 when it comes before the chamber for ct Final Vote. As always, please let me know if you have any questions. My email will be undergoing maintenance on Monday {4/23} so please contact Trey Williams at tw' . Respectfully, .Ien Jen Moreen Executive Director Arizona Association of Counties 1910 W. Jefferson Street Phoenix, AZ 35009 602 252 6563 222 602 254 0969 IQ. li- This email, and any files transmitted 1with: it, is the property of the Arizona Association of Counties and, unless indicated otherwise, is intended only for the individual or entity This email may contain information consider privileged or confidential and legally exempt from disclosure. If the reader is not the intended recipient, or the recipient's authorized agent, you are hereby advised that copying or dissemination of this communication is prohibited If you have received this email in error, please riotify the sender inunediotely. Norm Moore From: Lisette Flores Sent: Friday, April 20, 2013 1:43 PM To: Rhonda Barnes Subject: RE: 531466 - No More Consensus County Recorders Are Opposed Yup, I had received it but thanks for making sure I received a copy. We?re caucusing it on Monday. I?m hearing Gray will concur. From: Rhonda Barnes Sent: Friday, April 20, 2013 1:45 PM To: Lisette Flores Subject: Fwd: 581456 - No More Consensus County Recorders Are Opposed Just wanted to make sure you saw this. Sent from my iPhone Begin forwarded message: From: Kathren Coleman - RISCX ckcoleman risc.maric Date: April 20, 2018 at 1:28:57 PM MST To: Rhonda Barnes Sent: Thursday, April 19, 2018 4:43 PM To: Lisette Flores Subject: FW: 531466 - Counties Have Serious Cancers Amendment Importance: High From: Jen Merson Sent: Thursday, April 19, 2018 10:21 AM Subject: 531456 - Counties Have Serious Cancers Amendment Importance: High Dear Members of the House: The Arizona Association of Counties has serious concerns with the proposed floor amendment to 331466 - especially since the Senate Engrossed version was the result of negotiations between the counties and the Maricopa County Republican Party and Wane of that agreement 1mg Counties are a crucial stakeholder an election issues and ?g negotiated the Senate Engrosgecl version in good faith. We hope that the points of concern below can be factored into the debate today. We have always been willing to work on language and if the bill is held or if this amendment passes and the bill needs to go to Conference, we are absolutely willing to meet as we did before to address points of concern. We hope that counties can be at the table since this legislation impact all of Arizona's 15 counties. Please note that the County Supervisors Association was on board of the Senate Engrossed version. Our concerns are embedded in the amendment summary below in blue: 1. Removes language allowing: a. A county recorder or other officer in charge of elections to continue to operate early voting locations during the three-day period preceding the election, if precinct registers and other elections materials are able to be revised in a timely manner for use an election day; What is the logic behind removing MORE access for voters? We have long heard that voters in all political parties work Monday-Friday and it is a challenge for them to get to a polling place during typical work hours. If a county has the ability to remain in the world we limit this? b. A voting center to be used as a ballot replacement location Voters are entitled to replacement ballots per statute, so why wouldn't we be able to provide a replacement ballot to a voter at a vote center? There is a vote center near my office but I can't go there to get a replacement ballot I have to To the main office of the County Recorder? That is not a practical solution for the maiority of voters c. An elector to obtain a replacement ballot on presentation of a signed, sworn statement that the ballot was not cost, rather than last, spoiled, destroyed or not received. The net effect of removing this section is that counties can have ONLY ONE place per district to get a replacement ballot. We offered up changes to this section of law to account for a vote center environments (which, for example, the largely Republican County of Yavapai has been using for years). The existing language in this section says "district" that doesn?t work for vote centers which is why we suggested "Appropriate iurisdiction". 2. Removes the requirement for the county recorder or other officer in charge of elections to determine one or more locations, rather than a central location, to obtain a ballot replacement in the appropriate iurisdiction. The concerns with this issue are already noted above. 3. Stipulates a county recorder may only modify the approved early voting locations if on actual emergency occurs on election day or during the three-clay period preceding the election. Are long lines at the polls on "actual emergency" because that is what happened in Pinal County last fall and the Recorder decided to open up more locations, after the initial list was set [the Final example is the whole reason this language was agreed to in the negotiations}. This language would prevent that from happening. So we can modify the list for fires or floods, but not because of on-the-ground trends that we see that could be more efficient for voters? That seems like an odd policy choice. 4. Permits the 505 to directly authorize the use of additional types of voting and determine additional voting locations. Currently, the bill permits the 305 to authorize the county recorder or other officer in charge of elections to perform these functions. The 805 has no expertise In the realm of elections and should not be the sole decider of such things. This was a main point of contention with the Introduced Version of the bill and removing that sentiment was part of the negotiations to get to the Senate Engrossed version. As always, please let me know if you have questions. Respectfully, Jen Jen Marson Executive Director Arizona Association of Counties 1910 W. Jefferson Street Phoenix, AZ 85009 602 252 6563 222 602 254 0969 i ll This email, and any ?les transmitted with it, is the property of the Arizona Association of Counties and, unless indicated otherwise, is intended only for the individual or entity addressed. This email may contain information considered privileged or con?dential and legally exempt from disclosure. if the reader is not the intended recipient, or the recipient's authorized agent, you are hereby advised that copying or dissemination of this oomnmication is prohibited. If you have received this email in error, please notify the sender immediately. Norm Moore From: Keely Va nrel - RISCX skuaruel@risc.maricopa.gou> Sent: Thursday. April 19, 20131139 AM To: Jeff Winkler Cc: Selianna Robles; Lisette Flores Subject: Re: 531466 Ok thanks. Keely,r Vowel, Chief Deput?,r Of?ce of Maricopa County Recorder Adrian Fontes Email: Office: 602-506-1332 Sent from my iPhone On Apr 19, 2018, at 11:38 AM, Jeff Winkler wrote: Very well written! Moving forward on the Hobbs plan for the vacancy bill. We will discuss with the House and Hobbs is awaiting a call back from Coleman. Jeff Winkler Chief of Staff Arizona Senate Democratic Caucus 602-92644? iwinkler@azleg.gov From: Keely Vowel - RISCX Sent: Thursday, April 19, 2018 11:08 AM To: Rhonda Barnes Lisette Flores Selianna Robles Cc: Jeff Winkler Aragon Subject: Fwd: 531466 F'l?l Keely Verve I, Chief Deputy' Of?ce of Maricopa County Recorder Adrian Fontes Email: KVawei@risc.maricopa.eov Office: 602-506-1832 Sent from my lPhone Begin forwarded message: From: Adrian Fontes - RISCX cafon es risemarico a. ous- Date: April 19, 2018 at 11:02:20 AM MST To: Keely Varuel - RISCX ckuawngriscmaricopagoua, Jen Marson 1 cimarsont?lazcountiesoree, Leslie Hoffman Robyn Stallworth Subject: FW: 531466 This email just went out to all House members -Adrian From: Adrian Fontes - RISCX Sent: Thursday, April 19, 2018 11:01 AM Subject: $51456 Honorable Member of the Arizona House, I am urgently writing to discuss a bill that is being considered in Committee of the Whole TODAY by the House of Representatives -SB 1466. The Arizona Association of Counties, the County Recorders Association and the Elected Of?cials of Arizona - all bipartisan organizations worked diligently with the bill?s sponsor and other stakeholders to amend the bill, as it passed the Senate, to be a compromise. That compromise is about to be negated by the Mesnard Floor Amendment. The provisions of that amendment remove key changes to the bill that are a fundamental part of the compromise. ca n?t help but believe that the provisions of this bill are aimed at work being done in my office to expand early voting and provide more vote centers that allow voting at any location, and ensure ballots are counted [an issue being litigated in Jones Reagan) regardless of the voter?s precinct. As such, the Mesnard Floor Amendment, and the underlying bill (if amended}, can be considered an attack on the independent elected authority of the other County Recorders by requiring them to involve their County Boards of Supervisors in much more of the day-to-day administrative decisions regarding early voting, which, by existing statute, falls squarely under the jurisdiction of Arizona's County Recorders. The Mesnard Floor Amendment also removes an important provision of SB 1466, which allows Counties to approve weekend voting immediately prior to Election Day. This makes voting more convenient and reduces the possibility of long lines on Election Day. My office is already working collaboratively with the Maricopa County Board of Supervisors to plan and approve ?nal voting location maps. Recently, the Maricopa County Board of Supervisors approved a 5d million appropriation for our office to buy new voting equipment that further enables us to enact these reforms. If the Maricopa County Board of Supervisors are concerned that our voluntary collaborative efforts break down, the members could revise our standing charter agreement, which oversees the delegation of elections activity to my office. Legislation to codify what is already happening in Maricopa County is simply not necessary and will encroach on the authority of other independently elected County Recorders. I ask you to oppose the Mesnard Floor Amendment and the bill as a whole if the floor amendment passes Adrian Fontes Maricopa County Recorder Norm Moore From: Keely Varvel - RISCX Sent: Thursday, April 19, 201 11:36 AM To: Lisette Flores Subject: Re: 531466 I don?t know. We just heard about the amendment right before floor. Gray backed the original bill before the compromise and Mesnard's amendment pretty much just pulls those compromise provisions out. So he may be supportive of the Mesnard amendment. I don?t know. Keely VarveI, Chief Deputy Office of Maricopa County Recorder Adrian Fontes Email: KVarvel@risc.rnaricoga.gov Of?ce: 602-506-1832 Sent from my iPhone [in Apr 19, 2018, at 11:24 AM, Lisette Flores wrote: Thanks, Keely. Have there been any conversations with Gray to refuse those changes if the amendment does get adopted in House From: Keely Varvel - RISCX Sent: Thursday, April 19, 2013 11:08 AM To: Rhonda Barnes Lisette Flores Selianna Robles <5Robles@azleg.gov> Cc: Jeff WinklEl? Aragon cCAragonQazleggovav Subject: Fwd: 531466 FYI Keely 'v'arvel, Chief Deputy Of?ce of Maricopa County Recorder Adrian Fontes Email: Office: 602-506-1332 Sent from my iPhone Begin forwarded message: From: Adrian Fontes - HISCX Sent: Tuesday, March 5, 2018 4:52 PM To: Lisette Flores Subject: Fwd: Request Support 531465 Gray Amendment Sent from Jen's iPhone, liker with Siri- please excuse any typos or unexpected brevity. i no longer check} respond to texts or emails while driving. Begin forwarded message: From: Jen Marson Date: March 1, 2013 at 6:1?:34 PM EST Subject: Request Support 531456 Grayr Amendment Dear Members of the Senate: On behalf of the Arizona Association of Counties, and the County Recorders and Election Directors, we write today to ask you to support $31466 MW when it goes through COW next week {March 5-9). When this bill went through the Judiciary Committee we had some serious concerns but I am pleased to sha re that the stakeholder process was successful and the proponents of the bill and the county election experts have come to an agreement. The amendment is because in addition to making changes to the original it now also includes our bill from the House, H32206. Separately the bills were not bendable, so the stakeholders agreed to mesh them together so as not to have issues later. Below is a very quick list of the items in the amendment. I have not included much detail in order to keep this email concise. 16-19%: Adds language from HB2206 that removes a reference to old language 16-41 1: 0 Remove BOS involvement re: equipment and tabulation method I Adds 305 in early voting process via existing ?upon resolution? language I Adds ?vote center" definition from H32206 Adds language to clarify that on Election Day, a vote center is deemed a polling guns, no electioneerlng, etc per HB2206 amendment] 0 Adds bridge language to allow a Vote Center to be used as an Early Voting location or a Ballot Replacement Location {from 2206] i Keeps definition of "drop off center? from 1466 a Deletes definition of ?ea rlyur voting center" because the bridge language covers it Repeats Title 16, chapter 4, article 3 (outdated lever language from 2206) I Adds language from H32206 re: the appointment of election boards for voting centers [mimics existing language in 15-531] 16-542: 0 Adds language to apply ?upon resolution" language to early voting locations outside the Recorders office I Adds language to allow a Recorder to make changes to those sites and notify public/305 of the changes II Adds language from HB2206 re: if technology permits, you can have early voting open the weekend before Election Day 0 Adds language from H32206 re: codifies current process for emergency voting for counties that do not have technology to have extended early voting lab-588.02: language from H32206 that allows for more than one ballot replacement site {per 2206 amendment} I 16-534: adds language from HB2206 to remove reference to "ballot stubs" {we don't have those anymore} Oh course, please let me know if you have any questions and thank you for considering our request '0 $51466 Went. Respectfully, Jen Jen Moreen Executive Director Arizona Association of Counties 191 0 W. Jefferson Street Phoenix, AZ 35009 602 252 6.563 222 602 254 0969 on no This email, and any files transmitted with it, is the propertyr of the Arizona Association of Counties and, unless indicated othemise, is intended only for the individual or entity addressed. This emaii may contain information considered privileged or con?dential and legally' exempt from disclosure. if the reader is not the intended recipient, or the recipient's authorized agent, you are hereby advised that oopying or dissemination of this communication is prohibited. If you have received this email in error, please notify the sender immediately. Norm Moore From: Lisette Flores Sent: Thursday, February 15, 2013 10:22 AM To: Martin Quezada; Andrea Dalessandro; Lupe Contreras; Leonela Urrutia Subject: passed in the House this morning - recorders are in support of this bill, which addresses early voting centers. Norm Moore From: Kathren Coleman - RISCX ckcoleman@risc.maricopa.govs Sent: Tuesday, January 9, 2018 4:48 PM To: Rhonda Barnes; Jeff Winkler; Lisette Flores; Aragon Subject: RE: $81058 Attachments: February CD Special Elections Costs - Detailedpdf All, I know you all have been anxiously awaiting this information. I?m excited to work with you all this session, and appreciate your patience as our budget and elections departments work to get these answers. Attached is the detailed budget breakdown for the Congressional District 3 Special Elections held February 23"? {Primary} and April 24?" {General}. We have estimated $3.86fvoter *each* election, with a total estimated cost of $3.502 million [$1.751 per election] to administer. As you notice, this estimate is above the $2.50fvoter currentlv in 531058. and as you well know, the county has been subsidizing elections for the state at the lower per-voter cost. The Secretary of State?s office is working with our staff and Republican leadership to propose the per voter amount be set to $4.00, as this would be a *ceiling? for our reimbursement based on actual cost. Per our elections proposal to the Boa rd of Supervisors, the 143 voting precincts in Congressional District 8 will have 49- 52 polling locations, depending on our staff?s ability to locate an additional 3 facilities. This plan is pending approval with the Maricopa County Board of Supervisors. To track current registration numbers as thev are updated {month Iv, by our office}, please visit s: recordermarico a. ov voterre for your ease: Istratlon direct new.as x?vlew=con ressr nal. They are summarized below Current Active Registered Voters in Ma ricopa County: 2.1?6.331 Current Active Registered Voters in Congressional District 8: 454,201 Current PEVL Voters in Congressional District 8: 323,369 {estimated at 330,000 for budgetary purposes to capture additional Ballot-bv-Mail requests) I?ve set a conference call for tomorrow at 10:30am. I will be available to answer any questions you have after reviewing the attached budget - call-in instructions as follows: Phone Number: Participant code: If you have additional, urgent questions, I'd also like to offer my time this evening or tomorrow outside the set conference call time. I can be reached on my cell at 480.438.0919. Thank you all, ha 2018 session! Kathren Kathren Coleman Elections Policy Of?cer Maricopa Countv Recorder Adrian Fontes Phone: 602.506.131? Public: Disclosure Notice: This message and any messages in response to the sender of this message mayr be sublect to a public records request. From: Rhonda Barnes Sent: Tuesday, January 9, 2013 4:11 PM To: Kathren Coleman - RISCK ckcoleman@risc.maricopa.gova Cc: Lisette Flores Subject: RE: SB 1053 i think tomorrow will be better for me. Let me know what works for you. Rhonda From: Lisette Flores Sent: Tuesday, January 9, 2013 2:53 PM To: Kathren Coleman - RISCX Rhonda Barnes Aragon Subject: RE: 561053 Hi Kathren. My schedule is flexible so whichever time works for all. Lisette From: Kathren Coleman RISCX Sent: Tuesday, January 9, 2013 2:56 PM To: Rhonda Barnes Lisette Flores Aragon Subject: $31053 Happy 2013 Session! We are working through the details of 531053 -the funding for the Congressional District 3 election cost. The Recorder would like to call the leadership today to talk through the details of what we?ve worked on with the Secretary of State's of?ce. I'd also like to chat with you all to update staff. Would you be available for a call today or can I set something up for the morning to conference us all together? Many thanks, Kathren Kathren Coleman Elections Policy Of?cer Maricopa County Recorder Adrian Fontes I Phone: 502.505.2317] Public Disclosure Notice: This message and any messages in response to the sender of this message may be subject to a public records request. UPDATED WORTH- 12:30 PM MARICOFA COUNTY PORCH As of WIDE Irate? 454,096 TO MAIL OUT COST TO MAIL IN OHTHE 3.23.259 2'5 253 ON THE GROUNIJ 0.30 times 1.01 times 9 .135 eadl 9 3.196 PEVI. ?D-usemgafd?sfarha?m Emmi EARLY BALLOTS-330.000 .32 each 3.1% m: ALL EALLOTS (1051-52 mum SITE erH 4 PARTIES EACH ALI. BALLOTS 0.01 BALLOTS-50 PER STYLE- ESTIMATED ace STYLES @225 eacgplus at 3.24; on THE gonna 0.49 SAMPLE BALLOTS-EST 5335 hm AT .43 estimated EACH rim ON THE 6300 N0 0.12 SAMPLE BALLOT S-EST 130 5355 household AT .12 EACH as: PEVL 15 500 or 535 ME for images?2mm $5149.56 and tax at 3.134 PEI-IL 330,000 EARLY BALLOT AWL ENVELOPES ?1 563.62 PER THOUSAND AND TAX FEW. 330 000 EARLY BALLOTAFFIDAUIT ENVELOPES 547.54 PER THOUSAND PLUS TAIL AT E15 PEVL 330,000 BALLOT INSERTS El $33.35 PER THOUSAND PLUSTAR AT 3.1% PM 330320 VOTES- PROCESSING OUT 9 SL320 FER THOUSAND PLUS TAR AT 3.155 PEVL 1.05 EST 30%- EARLY 9 5330.132 PER THOUSAND PLUS TAR AT 3.156 pm 0.53 POSTAGE ON EARLY VOTING .13 GOING OUTAND ASSUME 30K RETURN AT .53 TOTAL ESTIMATE 254' 0.92 26.55.92 52 SITES 9 EGMMORRERSTSITE Qigf?? FOR :3 HOURS 3300.00 POLL SITE RENTALS - 52 SITES 9 $25 11093.92 19 TRDLIBLESHOOTERS 9 $15 HRS FDR an HOURS Ins 22mm INEIGHTTEAM MEMEER 1a - For men: Sen: 2 DAYS e1 12 HRHDAY 4 HRS TRAINING EA 9,499.45 15' TROUBLESHOOTERS MILEAGE I500 MILES Egg 50.545204" 5.5mm 3.0mm TRUCK - 1 TRUCK FOR 5 WES RENEW OFFICE TRANSPORTING BALLOTS 500.00 FUEL FOR TRUCK FOR RUNS LSCOIEIJ FUEL FOR TRUCKS 2,033.16 2 TJELMPS FOR RUNBECKIPOST OFFICE TRANSPORTION 24,113.60 5 ORWERS 3: HELPERS FOR 1! WKS Slim-IR FOR 1160 HOURS 50,565.53 PROCESING BOARDS- 4,224 HRS 4,224.60 54,505.63 SAISESSB SIGNATURE VERIFICATION 4,224 In: 3,600.00 HELP FOR VOTING 9 -4 TEMPS 50 000.00 310 3005 FROM ELECTION SERVICES in! Earl Um 25.000.00 AWERTISINEIOUTREACH TO - As ddsde with SOS 3364.00 AHELPERS EAL uefringe 3.30101 HANDCOUNT - 32 TEMPS 3 HOURS- SWR plus fringe Sheriff Dapu?t'les 25,000.00 ELECTION NIGHT 3: OTHER FIE OVERTINIE - SEE 2012' BUDGET 300.00 RECEIVING SITES -5 A HRS IQ PER HOUR ARMED 2.0001!) 2 DEPUTIES FOR 30,000.02 SECURITYCOSTS 522.330?! - MULTIPLE DAYS 350m FOOD COSTS FOR I-IANDCOLINT 3.30133 Speti? Election Boards - 5 PEOPLE SHIEA FOR 120 HRS EA PLUS FRINGE MISCELLANEOUS PRINTING 1325.00 TELECOM CHARGES 9 ME 6 52 SITE PLUS 3- EARLY VOTING SITES 15,241.73 EARLY VOTING SITE - 1 SITE EA FOR 3 HR DAYS FOR 23" OATS OUT 12,401.23 EAFILII VOTING SITE - 2 SITES 6 EA. FOR 3 HR DAYS FOR 10 OATS OUT 3,370.85 OT EARLY SITE FOR 3 WEEKENDS - 1 SITES 0 9 EA FOR 12 HR DAYS FOR 2? DAYS OUT 3,220.33 OT EARLY VOTING SITE FOR 1 WEEKEND - 2 SITES 5 IE EA FOR 12 HR DAYS FOR 10 DAYS OUT 300.49 MCTEC OT EARLY VOTING SITE FOR 2 WEEKENDS - $3541.01 54354101 $3.35 ESTIMATED COST PER REGISTERED VOTER PER ELECTION 552537531 $3,502,203 TOTAL ESTIMATED COST FOR TWO ELECTIONS Norm Moore From: Jen Marson cjmarson@azcounties.org> Sent: Tuesday, April 24, 2013 9:53 AM Subject: 531466 - County Reasoning Clari?ed - We Remain Opposed Follow Up Flag: FollowUp Flag Status: Flagged Dear Senators: Recently the remarks from caucus re: 1456 were shared with me and there are several clarifications that need to be made. The Arizona Association of Counties has always been happy to try and work through issues. Sometimes in the end the parties have to agree to disagree, and each side works the members for votes. It is our hope, that since we are at that point with 531455, we can all start from the same factual place. Below are the caucus remarks and our clarification embedded within. As always, please let me know if you have questions. Respectfully, Jen Marson Executive Director Arizona Association of Counties Sponsored by: Gray Presented by: Vicente Reyna Decision: CONCUR Senator Gray: Just so all of our members know, this is probably going to be contentious because they didn?t' get everything they wanted and because the Senatg was unraveled WITHOUT ANY conversation with counties to tn; and make the language work for i talked to house leadership and they had some concerns about the legalities of the weekend voting and disenfranchising voters [weekend votingls neither illega_l, nor an i violation - so sa both and election Attorn in a The only thing that was removed was the weekend, the whole three clays before the voting, which we never had before. So, we are not taking away any voter previous rights, we are iust not granting more. Also for voting centers to be used as a ballot replacement location, we never had that before, we basically had a centralized location that they had to pick up their ballot and that is the same {This is inagcgiggtg. ghange we wanted re: ballot replacement centers was to co i current i In center environment. OF COURSE ballots sh I re laced at the same lace eo I votg. Vgge? naturally show up at the place where they wgulg um and we have to tell them to go Enlacement ballot gomewhg? else? That is counter productive) They may be unhappy with that, but we are not regressing at all, we are leaving that the same (Statute is behind the times?and needgd to be updated}. Also, a lot of this is clarifying the early voting centers are still under the authority of the board of supervisors. There may be some angst saying we are disenfranchising voters, but I will give you one example in our district for CD 8. Fontes was going to reduce number of voting centers in sun city. The average age is around the late T?s. We've got people in the southern city that will not cross Grand Ave and come up to the central part of Sun City because they are uncertain about their physical capabilities. They were going to reduce number of voting centers to 1 in sun city, that would drastically disenfranchise voters. Fortunately, our supervisor worked to make sure we had those, but the board of supervisors has the responsibility and oversight of the election process. The recorder would bring their plan and present that and okay that, but they still have the oversight. What we have done in the bill is make sure it is clari?ed in statute, so there is no uncertainty, that the early voting centers are under the board of supervisors (This is undoes Senate agreement, without even allowing counties to a the table as a key That de?nitely needs to be clari?ed. We never had voting locations 1 open all weekend long, and never had a place that you can go anywhere and get a new ballot because you swear you didn't have a good ballot Correct re: weekend in st at inaccurate re: re lacement ball 1. Nothing in this amendment disenfranchises or reduces any voter rights from what we currently have. My concern is because they didn?t get everything they wanted, I guess they don?t appreciate the word compromise {it i5 not a compromise if counties werg n9; irnl'itedI despite repeated ?ggests, to the table. Milo has alwa? been ggnuing in its negotiations}, we also removed a lot archaic language for things thatjust don't apply. You probably got the email from Jen Larsen saying they are not happy with it and lasked her if should would rather have the bill die, even though we have made these improvements, and she said "yeah." {What I sgid was ?yes, the changes give full authority to the BUS which was our main on the introduced vergign. It also only allows for modifications on 4 gaggi?c days?l don't think that is a good way to proceed just on a policy basis. (in a policy basis we improved things, we articulated the boa rd is over the early voting centers and the recorders have to bring the plan. 0n the emergencies too, that is clarified that if they have an emergency they just have to have the board approval (but in the bill an emeggency can only ogch in a gpeci?c Il-day not how emergencigg work]. When you are the board of supervisors, you are paid for all of this so if we were to go around them, we would in essence say you have to be ?nancially responsible for what the elected of?cial does and they don't have to get your okay and they can do whatever they want, and that is not good business. [895 are not in chagge of oghgr gleged officials. They approve budgets. This wasn?t tolerated when Sheriff 19g was in office, nor should It have been. This oversight is not being soughg for 1hg ?heri?. Treasures. Assessor. etc -and it should not be being asked ofthe Recomgr who goplg pickgd to do that lob} Again, the only thing we've clone is clarify as we are moving forward, and not giving them as much new language as what they wanted, but we are not disenfranchising the voters. So, I need your support. Sent from my iPad Norm Moore From: Jen Marson cjmerson?azcauntiesorg> Sent: Friday, April 20, 2013 1:03 PM Cc: Trey Williams: Megan l-(intnerr Intern Subject: $31466 - No More Consensus County Recorders Are Opposed Importance: High Follow Up Flag: Follow up Flag Status: Flagged "it may be that Sen. Gray refuses the House amendments and takes this bill to Conference, but i cannot get that confirmed and knowing there is limited time left, i?m working on the premise that 53 i 466 will not go to Coni?ierenceMI Dear Members of the Senate: Many weeks ago the Senate Judiciary Committee heard 531466 the bill being pushed by the Maricopa County Republican Party that would have given sole authority to the Board of Supervisors to establish early voting locations. It was a contentious hearing because all 15 County Recorders were opposed and when voting the committee ma do it clear that the proponents needed to work with counties moving forward. That process was successful and an agreement was reached that resulted in the Senate Engrossed Version which passed your chamber 29-0. The Arizona Association of Counties, and the County Recorders are once again opposed to 551466 because of the House floor amendment that was added.T of theS not -- -- -1. 1= 2.1-.- -. ua.Countiesareacrucial stakeholders on election issues and - The House floor amendment (our concerns are noted blue}: Removes the ability for weekend voting it the county has the technology to adequately update signature rosters I Why would election experts offer LESS access to voting it the technology is there to provide more access? I Counties have heard complaints from members of both parties that getting to a polling place on a weekday is a challenge this would allow them to come in on the weekend 2. Removes the ability for a vote center to be used as a ballot replacement location I Voters are legally entitled to a replacement ballot if something happens to the original, if a vote center is in place that seems like a logical place to distribute replacement ballots 3. Removes the ability for there to be more than one ballot replacement site per district 0 Current language says only one replacement location ?per district". The term "district" does not apply to a vote center environment and that is why counties suggested changes to this section so that replacement ballot language works in a polling place and a vote center environment 0 More than one location for a replacement ballot helps voters by providing more access 4. Requires that a Recorder can only modify the approved list of early voting locations if an "actual" emergency exists AND those emergency modifications can only occur on Election Day or the weekend prior to Election day The sentence was altered in such a way that Recorders can only make changes in that 4-day window - so what happens if an emergency occurs a week before the election? Two weeks before? I The word "actual" was not defined. It reads as though it means a natural emergency - if that is not the intent then: i. Why add the word "actual"? ii. Does this allow counties to use flexibility in determining what is an emergency? 5. Gives full control to the 305 to determine types of voting and voting locations I This flies in the face of the compromise that counties and the Marlcopa County Republican Party agreed to in the Senate I Existing statute gives the Recorder complete control yet and the County Recorders agreed to work "in coniunction" with the 505 per the negotiations I This turns complete control over to the BOS who have no expertise in election administration For the reasons noted above we request your opposition to 531466 when it comes before the chamber for a Final Vote. As always, please let me know if you have any questions. My email will be undergoing maintenance on Monday (4/23) so please contact Trey Williams at Respectfully, .Ien Jen Marson Executive Director Arizona Association of Counties 1910 W. Jefferson Street Phoenix, AZ 35009 602 252 6563 222 602 254 0969 tilt it- This email, and any files transmitted with it, is the property of the Arizona Association of Counties and, unless indicated otherwise, is intended only for the individual or entity addressed. This email may contain information considered privileged or confidential and legally exempt from disclosure. If the reader is not the intended recipient, or the recipient's authorized agent, you are hereby advised that copying or dissemination of this aotnmunlcatian is prohibited. If you have received this email in error, please notify the sender imn'iediately. Norm Moore I From: Rick Gray Sent: Thursday, April 19. 2018 10:36 AM To: Chris Herring; lisa@lisagrey.com Subject: Fw: 531466 - Counties Have Serious Concers Amendment Importance: High FYI Rick Gray AZ State Senate Legislative District 21 602-926-5413 Office From: Jen Marson Sent: Thursday, April 19, 2018 10:21 AM Subject: $31466 - Counties Have Serious Cancers Fir Amendment Importance: High Dear Members of the House: The Arizona Association of Counties has serious concerns with the proposed floor amendment to 331466 - especially since the Senate Engrossed version was the result of negotiations between the counties and the Maricopa County Republican Party and thi am nt undoes i nifi nt rti Wseaa?edmm?m?u?dmm- are initial ?ukehold?r on electionissuesand - r: 1.: i dfaith. We hope that the points of concern below can be factored into the debate today. We have always been willing to work on language and if the bill is held or if this amendment passes and the bill needs to go to Conference, we are absoluter willing to meet as we did before to address points of concern. We hope that counties can be at the table since this legislation impact all of Arizona?s 15 counties. Please note that the County Supervisors Association was on board of the Senate Engrossed version. Our concerns are embedded in the amendment summaryP below in blue: 1. Removes language allowing: a. A county recorder or other officer in charge of elections to continue to operate ea rly voting locations during the three-day period preceding the election, if precinct registers and other elections materials are able to be revised in a timely manner for use on election day; What is the logic behind removing MORE access for voters? We have long heard that voters in all political parties work Monday-Friday and it is a challenge for them to get to a polling place during typical work hours. If a county has the ability to remain in the world we limit this? b. A voting center to be used as a ballot replacement location Voters are entitled to replacement ballots per statute, so why wouldn?t we be able to provide a replacement ballot to a voter at a vote center? There is a vote center near my office but I can't go there to get a replacement ballot have to To the main office of the County Recorder? That is not a practical solution for the maiority of voters c. An elector to obtain a replacement ballot on presentation of a signed, sworn statement that the ballot was not cost, rather than last, spoiled, destroyed or not received. The net effect of removing this section is that counties can have ONLY ONE place per district to get a replacement ballot. We offered up changes to this section of law to account for a vote center environments (which, for example, the largely Republican County of Yavapai has been using for years}. The existing language in this section says "district" - that doesn't work for vote centers which is why we suggested "Appropriate iurisdiction". 2. Removes the requirement for the county recorder or other of?cer in charge of elections to determine one or more locations, rather than a central location, to obtain a ballot replacement in the appropriate iurisdiction. The concerns with this issue are already noted above. 3. Stipulates a county recorder may only modify the approved early voting locations if an actuoi emergency occurs on election day or during the three-day period preceding the election. Are long lines at the polls on "actual emergency? because that is what happened in Pinal County last fall and the Recorder decided to open up more locations, after the initial list was set (the Final example is the whole reason this language was agreed to in the negotiations}. This language would prevent that from happening. So we can modify the list for fires or floods, but not because of on-the-ground trends that we see that could be more efficient for voters? That seems like an odd policy choice. 4. Permits the 305 to directly authorize the use of additional types of voting and determine additional voting locations. Currently, the bill permits the 805 to authorize the county recorder or other officer in charge of elections to perform these functions. The BOS has no expertise in the realm of elections and should not be the sole decider of such things. This was a main point of contention with the introduced Version of the bill and removing that sentiment was part of the negotiations to get to the Senate Engrossed version. As always, please let me know if you have questions. Respectfully, Jen Jen Marson Executive Director Arizona Association of Couaties 1910 W. Jefferson Street Phoenix, AZ 85009 602 252 6563 222 602 254 0969 Hi i? This email, and any files transmitted with it, is the property of the Arizona Association of Counties and, unless indicated otherwise, is intended oniy for the individual or entity addressed. This email may contain information considered privileged or confidential and legally exempt from disclosure. It the reader is not the intended recipient, or the recipient's ou?so?xed agent, you; are hereby advised that copying or dissemination of this communication is prohibited. If you have received this email in error, please notify the sender Immediately. Norm Moore From: Rick Gray Sent: Tuesday, March 6, 2018 5:06 PM To: Christopher Herring; lisa@lisagray.com Subject: Fwd: SB 1466 Proposed Amendment More FYI Rick Gray AZ Senate LD 21 Of?ce: 602.926.5413 Original message From: Jen Marson Date: 3,16,?18 5:03 PM To: Jake Agron Cc: Chris Herring Kimberly Yee Rick Gray Garth Kamp (GKampl'g?Jazleggova Subject: Re: SB 1466 Proposed Amendment Honestly - it?s not needed at all. What already happens is that data from previous elections is used to determine voting locations and other things for ""future"I elections. There is no need to legislate that -counties do that already. My challenge at this point is, it?s very unlikely that I can get enough feedback from my folks before tomorrow. Especially because i am in DC. While I don?t believe the language is necessary it?s not my call. Our method at Ante is that because our members are elected we don't guess how they feel. No one elected me- so I have to wait to hear from them. I would respectfully request that the only amendment offered tomorrow is the agreed upon Gray amendment. We have time to make adjustments in the House if need be and of course we are willing to have those conversations with whomever has concerns. As I noted to Sen. Gray last week - right now all 15 Recorders AND all 15 election directors are in support of the bill with the Gray amendment. Jen Sent from Jen's iPhone, likely with Siri- please excuse any typos or unexpected brevity. I no longer checkfrespond to tests or emails while driving. On Mar 6, 2013, at 6:36 PM, Jake Agron wrote: 1 Good Afternoon Jen and Chris, In Caucus this morning, there was discussion regarding SB 1455 and early voting center usage. Speci?cally, Senator Yee raised the issue of whether the elections departments of each county would have data on the usage rate of earlv voting centers. This information could then be used for subsequent election cycles to appropriately plan for the amount of voting centers that may be needed. We drafted language that would require the recorder or other of?cer in charge of elections to report back to the BUS on what percentage of voters used voting centers {including earlv voting centers} within 30 days of the election. Jen, I think this is more for you, but wanted to loop Chris in as well?does this language seem workable? If so, does a 30-day deadline to report back to the 305 feel appropriate? The bill is currently on the COW calendar for tomorrow. Thank 1you and please don?t hesitate to he in contact with em; questions. Best, lake Agron Research Director Legislative Research Analyst, Judiciary Committee Arizona State Senate p. 602326-3171 Norm Moore From: Rick Gray Sent: Thursday, March 1, 2016 3:14 PM To: Christopher Herring Subject: Fwd: Request Support 531466 Gray Amendment Importance: High FYI Rick Gray AZ Senate LD 21 Office: 602.926.5413 Original message From: Jen Ma rson sjmarson@azcounties.org> Date: Mills 4:18 PM To: Subject: Request Support 531466 to Gray Amendment Dear Members of the Senate: On behalf of the Arizona Association of Counties, and the County Recorders and Election Directors, we write today to ask you to support 531466 with [lag ?rst}: floor amendment when it goes through COW next week (March When this bill went through the Judiciary Committee we had some serious concerns but i am pleased to share that the stakeholder process was successful and the proponents of the bill and the county election experts have come to an agreement. The amendment is because in addition to making changes to the original 551466, it now also includes our bill from the House, HB2206. Separately the bills were not bendable, so the stakeholders agreed to mesh them together so as not to have issues later. Below is a veryr quick list of the items in the amendment. I have not included much detail in order to keep this email concise. 16-193: Adds language from H3220o that removes a reference to old language 16-411: Remove 3015 involvement re: equipment and tabulation method Adds 303 in early voting process via existing "upon resolution" language Adds "vote center" definition from H32206 Adds language to clarify that on Election Day, c: vote center is deemed a polling guns, no electioneering, etc {per HB2206 amendment) I Adds bridge language to allow a Vote Center to be used as an Early Voting location or a Ballot Replacement Location [from 2206} I Keeps definition of "drop off center" from 1466 Deletes definition of "early voting center" because the bridge language covers it Repeals Title 16, chapter 4, article 3 {outdated lever language from 2206} I Adds language from HB2206 re: the appointment of election boards for voting centers [mimics existing language in 15-531} 16-542: Adds language to apply ?upon resolution" language to early voting locations outside the Recorders office I Adds language to allow a Recorder to make changes to those sites and notify public/305 of the changes 0 Adds language from HB2206 re: if technology permits, you can have early voting open the weekend before Election Day It Adds language from H82 206 re: codifies current process for emergency voting for counties that do not have technology to have extended early voting 16-53802: language from HB2206 that allows for more than one ballot replacement site (per 2206 amendment] 16-534: adds language from HB2206 to remove reference to "ballot stubs" [we don't have those anymore} Oh course, please let me know if you have any questions and thank you for considering our request to support 531466 with the Gray float gmendment. Respectfully, .Ien Jen Marson Executive Director Arizona Association of Counties 1910 W. Jefferson Street Phoenix, AZ 35009 602 252 6563 222 602 254 0969 This email, and any files transmitted with it, is the property of the Arizona Association of Counties and, unless indicated otherwise, is intended only for the individual or entity addressed. This email may oantaln information considered privileged or confidential and legally exempt from disclosure. If the reader is not the intended recipient, or the recipient's authorized agent, you are hereby advised that oopying or dissemination of this communication is prohibited. If you have received this email 1n error, please notify the sender immediately. Norm Moore From: Jen Marsan Cc: Chris Herring Marge Ray Garth Kamp Jake Agron Robin Hillvard REC - Leslie Hoffman Robyn Pouquette Subject: 1466 DRAFT Floor Amendment Importance: High Sen. Gray: I think the attached draft captures what was discussed in the meeting yesterday. It?s clearly not in the perfect format, because I need Marge's help for the placement of some of the language, but I believe all points discussed are included. i have copied those that were at the stakeholder meeting so everyone can double check my work before I send it out to the masses. 1 want to be sure we are all on the same page before taking the next step. If I have missed anything, please let me know. Here are the points addressed in the amendment in order: 1. 16-193: Adds language from HB2206 that removes a reference to old language 2. 16-41 1: Remove BOS involvement re: equipment and tabulation method I Adds 303 in ea rig:r voting process via existing "resolution" language I Adds "vote center'I definition from HB2206 I Add: language to clarify that on Election Day, a vote center is deemed a polling guns, no electioneerlng, etc {per HB2206 amendment} 0 Adds bridge language to allow a Vote Center to be used as an Early Voting location or a Ballot Replacement Location [from 2206} I Keeps definition of ?d rap off center" from 1466 It Deletes definition of "early voting center" because the bridge language covers it 1 Repeals Title 16, chapter 4, article 3 {outdated lever language from 2206) Adds language from HB2206 re: the appointment of election boards for voting centers [mimics existing language in 15-531} 5. 16-542: - Adds language to apply "resolution" language to early voting locations outside the Recorders office - Adds language to allow a Recorder to make changes to those sites and notify public/30$ of the changes 0 Adds language from H32206 re: if technology permits, you can have early voting open the weekend before Election Day 0 Adds language from HB2206 re: codifies current process for emergency voting for counties that do not have technology to have extended early voting 6. 16-53302: language from H32206 that allows for more than one ballot replacement site (per 2206 amendment} 7. 16-534: adds language from H52206 to remove reference to ?ballot stubs" [we don?t have those anymore} :lisl-tl Thanks again for working with us on this. Respectfully, Jen Jen Marsen Executive Director Arizona Association of Counties 1 9i 0 W. Jefferson Street PhoEnix, AZ 35009 602 252 6563 222 602 254 0969 see vets This email, and any files transmitted with it, is the property of the Arizona Association of Counties and, unless indicated otherwise, is intended only for the individual or entity addressed. This email mayr contain information considered privileged or confidential and legally exempt from disclosure. It the reader is not the intended recipient, or the recipient's authorized agent, you are hereby advised that copying or dissemination of this communication is prohibited. If you have received this email in error, please notify the sender immediately. Norm Moore From: Chris Herring Sent: Friday, February 9. 2013 T139 PM To: Rick Gray: Garth Kemp Cc: Lisa Gray Subject: Fwd: 1466 - Recorders Feedback 3.: 2206 Info As Well Follow Up Flag: FollowUp Flag Status: Flagged Rick and Garth, Below is a summary from my meeting yesterday with Jen Ma rson of AACO and follow up meeting today with their members. Garth, as the changes are significant it may be best for us to meet and discuss. Chris Begin forwarded message: From: Jen Marson cimarsonfg?lazcountiesorgs Date: February 9, 2018 at 1:37:43 PM MST To: "chrisherringazanhoocom" cchrish rrin a2 ahoo.corn.> Cc: Trey Williams ctwiIliamsQazcauntiesorg}, Megan Kintner smkintner azcountiesor a Subject: 1466 - Recorders Feedback 2206 Info As Well Hi Chris: Thanks again for meeting with me yesterday. The Recorders spent a lot of time this morning discussing HB2206 and 466 and here is where they are: H32206 - We will remove 16-243 as you requested - Page 6, line 37 after the period insert CONSULTATION WITH THE COUNTY BOARD OF - We will still be offering the other amendments I mentioned yesterday {with which you did not express concerns): a Amend subsection A of hit-558.02 to read: THE COUNTY RECORDER OR OTHER OFFICER IN CHARGE OF ELECTIONS SHALL DETERMINE ONE OR MORE LOCATIONS IN THE APPROPRIATE JURISDICTION TO OBTAIN A REPLACEMENT Amend Section 4, 16-421, adding verbiage that explicitly applies polling place rules and regulations in 16-515, 16-579, and 13?3102 is required on Election Day, no pictures, no guns, no electioneering etc] to the voting center language so that it's clear those polling place rules and regulations apply any time a county designates certain polling locations as voting centers. 531466 - Thank you for all of the amendment suggestions that you mentioned yesterday. I have copied them below and the Recorders replies are noted in green: 1. Page I, remove the changes to lines 16-1 9. AGREED 2. Page 1, line 44-45, pick softer wording that mimics other sentences in election law. Not ?sole authority" but something softer ?After consultation with the Board the Recorder or something similar. Same at the top of page 2 as the paragraph continues AGREED 3. Page 2, delete lines 12-18 and instead use our definition of vote center from 2206 {page 5 lines 37-45) AGREED Page 2, delete lines 25-26 AGREED 5. In 16-542 [which is a section that is also in 2206) either: 3. Delete the last two sentences of existing A. We do not like this option QB it. Keep the last two sentences of A but add some kind of Board oversight as in previous sections. We are suggesting the same change in 1466 as we are putting in 2066 re: this issue. That allows the sections to be blendable even though our bill has additional new language as well. 6. Making the bill specific to Maricopa and Pima. We are hopeful that we can come to an agreement on the language and treat all counties the same. We are not in favor of making these changes apply' only to Maticopa and Pima I think we are much closer than i thought we would be. I will not start drafting the amendment till i hear back from you. Just so you know, I will be in DC starting tomorrow but of course I'll have access to my email. I appreciate your willingness to try and find a compromise. I look forward to hearing from you, .len Jen Mai-son Executive Director Arizona Association of Counties 1910 W. Jefferson Street Phoenix, AZ 85009 602 252 6563 2212 602 2.54 0969 see one This email, and anv tiles transmitted with it, is the property of the Arizona Association of Counties and, unless indicated otherwise, is blended only for the individual or entity addressed. this email mav contain information considered privileged or oon?dentiai and legally exempt from disclosure. If the reader is not the intended recipient, or the recipient's authorized agent. you are hereinr advised that cop-ring or dissemination of this communication is prohibited. If you have received this email in error, please notify the sender i-nmediotely. Norm Moore From: Rick Gray Sent: Sunday, April 29, 2018 5:32 AM To: Kristin Roberts Subject: RE: Meeting Thursday? Kristin, I?ve been amazed out how much angst the amendment brought up. We currently don't have weekend voting and we have to go to a central location to get a new ballot. The amendment left those requirements the same. It did NOT restrict any current voting right or make it harder for any voter. Because of that I accepted the amendment so that it could be passed. There is too many important changes to just let the bill die. Rick Gray AZ State Senate Legislative District 21 602-925-5413 Office From: Kristin Roberts Sent: Sunday, April 22, 2018 12:43 PM To: Rick Gray Subject: Re: Meeting Thursday? Senator, Thanks for the email and the time you spent with teachers Friday night. I apologize for the late hour of my message. I have my church life group every other Friday evening, and I ended up staying late chatting. Regardless of our disagreements over policies, I am really happy to know you are my brother in Christ. I appreciate the verse you sent, and I honestly did spend time praying over it. Ultimately, I do my best to follow God, but there are human leaders I admire and hope to learn from. One of my greatest heroes is Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. I?m not sure if you were thinking of Noah Karvelis and his leadership. I've known him for about a year. He recommended I read a book from Dr. King, and have had a lot of respect for him since then, but ultimately, I appreciate the reminder to follow after those who lead me In the right path. I?m glad you?re con?dent that you?ll be able to pass a bill to increase salaries for educators. Even if it?s without Democrats. While I am a D, I care a lot more about policy than party. When you work on that bill, I would like to ask that you consider the funding sources. I don't want money that is meant for the poor or the disabled. I'm also concerned about sustainability. And I would like to ask that you remember the other educators who are equally if not more essential in kids? lives. Out of curiosity, you mentioned a bill you were getting through the House. Was it SB 1466? i was happy to see that bill leave the Senate with so much support. What happened in the House? How do you feel about the amendment? have to do more reading, but I hope you are able to preserve your original bill to protect weekend voting. I hope your Sunday is restful and restorative. Norm Moore From: NCSL TODAY Sent: Friday. June 15. 2018 7:40 AM To: Steven B. Yarbrough Subject: (till {:0ch Lane? a; S'latr Strong Siege. 5:133:13 Two states will require teaching mental health in schools It?eesmaths TOP NEWS June 15, 2018 Many recommend teaching mental health in school. Now two states will require it Statellne Amid sharply rising rates of teen suicide and adolescent mental illness. two states have enacted laws that for the ?rst time require public schools to include mental health education in their basic curriculum. Rural America struggles with obesity epidemic The Hill Americans living outside of large metropolitan areas are much more liker to be obese than those who live in cities and suburbs. a public health challenge that could be shortening the lives of rural residents. Lawsuits claim congressional maps dilute black vote in three states Associated Press .- i uifp?.? . .nu Podcast: Summer learning programs closing achievement gaps Taking classes in the summer was once seen as a punitive measure. Research. though. is showing that students of all ages and grades oflen suffer from a "summer slide." or summer learning loss that makes re- entry to school in the fall more dif?cult. ?Tx?Hear from thought leaders at NCSL's Legislative Summit July 30-Aug. 2 Attorneys ?led separate federal lawsuits in Alabama, Georgia and Louisiana, challenging congressional weblna? Early maps lawmakers in each state approved in 2011. learning 5Y5tem5: international trends and For state budgets, what a difference six 900d months make Gavemmg Legislatures-ata-glance: After two straight years of lackluster revenue growth, interactive graphic state ?nances are on the upswing thanks in large part isstable economy and a one?time boost from Deoember?s federal tax overhaul. Supreme Court's revocation-on-divorce North Carolina considers eliminating ruling affects many states last Saturday of early voting Supreme cm mm 3-1 that Raleigh applying Minnesota's revocation-on- A popular day for early voting would be eliminated divorce statute to a ?fe insurance under a proposal that supporters sayr is meant to bring bene?ciary designation made before uniformity to the 100 North Carolina counties' one-stop the statute?s enactment does not voting violate the Constitution's Contracts i Clause. Choctaw casinos would be first in Mississippi to offer sports betting Clarion Ledger Choctaw of?cials also anticipate being the ?rst Native American tribe in the US. to offer sports betting. is} National Conference of State Legislatures Denver: Washington: Click here to unsubscribe WOO East First Place, Denver. CO 80230 Norm Moore From: NCSL TODAY senews?ncstorge Sent: Tuesday, June 5, 2016 ?:52 AM To: Steven B. ?rarbrough Subject: I it'll. ?0 r. nf 91s.? I I. TOP NEWS June 5, 2018 Will the new foster care law give grandparents a hand? Statelr?ne A new federal law overhauling the foster care system aims to give grandparents and other "kinship caregivers" raising often traumatized children more support. mm mil Fir California's primary system flummoxes Democrats, GOP The Hill Eight years after California voters bucked party leaders to establish a "jungle" primary system, Democrats and Republicans alike have serious misgivings about the system as voters head to the polls on Tuesday for a critical day of voting. NCSL resources on state comm Are vote centers the next big thing in Florida elections? Tampa Ba Times it - Pr vention Services Act. Will the new foster care law give grandparents a handStrong badger. 5:}ng Ne . ill 1 In.? .I . it.? I sir-stall? w? . . .. .. Capitol to Capitol: Congress returns to an immigration debate A discharge petition to automatically force a debate and vote on immigration legislation on the House floor is only ?ve signatures short of the required 218. .4.. Thursday webinar: Sharing the sun - community solar An increasingly mobile society and the widespread support for earlyr voting makes it inevitable. experts say. that people will embrace voting at regional sites subject to the approval by the state Legislature. NCSL data cited. NCSL gg genters. New Jersey lawmakers clobber sports leagues in betting bill Reuters New Jersey lawmakers on Monday advanced a bill to legalize sports betting that omitted all of the fraud ?ghting measures requested by professional sports leagues, who had battled the legal change for years and got a drubbing from an angry legislator. North Carolina bills would legalize small amounts of marijuana Winston-Salem Journal A County legislator is sponsoring a Senate bill that would make it legal to possess up to four ounces of marijuana for personal use. Michigan legislature poised to repeal prevailing wage law Associated Press A 53-year-old Michigan law that guarantees higher "prevailing" wages for construction workers on state- ?nanced projects could soon be nulli?ed. Election dates for legislators, governors who will do redistricting Step Up! Seeking staff nominations for Executive Committee Baker wins same-sex wedding cake case in narrow opinion In a decision in Masterpiece Cakeshop, Ltd. v. Colorado Civil Rights Commission. the US. Supreme Court reversed a ruling against the owner of a cake shop who refused to create a wedding cake for a same-sex couple because of his religious beliefs. National Conference of State Legislatures Denver: 303?364?Ti?i3 Washington: BUR-8246400 Click hem to unsubso'ibe WOO East First Place, Denver, CO 30230 Norm Moore From: Ef?cientGov Sent: Monday, April 30, 2013 9:01 AM To: Steven B. Yarbrough Subject: Neighborhood opioid data, 14 Smart Cities named. Pregnancy Prevention Grants to continue April 30. 2013 I View as webpage dinning leaders. Dear Ef?clantGov Subscriber, We continue our Special Coverage of Smart Cities in today's Member News. Read about an award-winning asset management solution led by Arlington, Texas. Park a Rec. Did you know that you can tell a lot about opioid abuse by studying sewage? Even get data on a neighborhood level? Five cities are needed to participate in a tech start-up pilot. Learn more and apply in the call below. We're also ?lled with news on decisions by courts. the FCC and local governments on not ending pregnancy prevention grants, early?r voting, dish blight, assault weapons and more. We encourage our members to reach out to us with ideas, we always appreciate hearing from you at E?icientGov Editor; Andrea i=thr TOP NEWS Arlington Park 8. Rec is Winning with Smart Asset Management Assault Weapons Ban by Local Ordinance Deer?eld, Illinois. is the second Chicago suburb to pass an assault weapons ban by local ordinance beginning June 13th. Retired of?cers exempt. FCC Overrules Philadelphia?s Dish 5 I Blight Ordinance An asset management initiative led by Park 15? . Banning street-facing Rec has helped put the city of Arlington, Texas. 3 . _u satellites is seen as on the smart city map. infringing on individual rights. Learn more about Read about the award City and State dish blight laws and bills. On the hunt for grants? i' 1 Still budgeting Ii: Get [ester and easier operating. solar; and capital liili'lg?l preparation and management With the preferred software solution to lU?ai gcvm'mm'nits. with spreadsheets - i . .. . I in; Learn more atNew Higsuzmsu teessees-as. TECH news How Proof of Concept Saves Money on the Smart City Journey Proof of concept helped the mid-size city of Belfort, France. test drive smart city solutions, saving money and improving bus service. EFFICIENTGOV NEWS I Judge Rules DHS Has 90 Days to Explain Why DACA Is Unlawful I Marion County Ordered to Open Early Voting for 2018 Elections 1- Warning Glyophosphate: California Wins Legal Defense I Judge Overturns HHS Ending Teen Pregnancy Prevention Grants More news TECH NEWS 14 Award-Winning Smart Cities in North America Named The ID: Smart City North America Awards named 14 cities. one state and one university.r for innovations that improve public services. CALL FOR 5 CITIES Wastevvater: An Untapped Resource for Opioid Abuse Data . it - - [.51 . .3 .f II.- . mm" inmate-37v: .. .- . .- - One tech startup is looking for ?ve cities to test how wastevvater can reveal opioid abuse data on a neighborhood level. Learn more and apply. . Lfnci?nHL-im (1095.. :ml? ?Efi?llil "fun run l'hi-a :una-?I Imucaumz you 11% ulgnm up far and to ths. 1? film 11:31 lu fu'tlm: eu?naiig, unqubscrihe. Norm Moore From: Chairman Lines wrote: Please see below. 'l-trom: Jones, Teresa Sent: Tuesday, November 6, 2018 6:42 AM To: Romney, David Subject: Church Sign at Church Polling Location David, Just FYI on this Anonvmous caller concerned with polling location #393 at Friends Church, 39'" Ave just north of Northern, church sign reflects "God is Love, Trump is Hate?; caller offended and feels sign is inappropriate and in bad taste Explained 7'5-ft limit no electioneering at poll location, however, text on sign probava not electioneering inasmuch as it does not express support or opposition to a candidate on ballot Caller did not want to leave name or contact info ffTeresa Fisher, Renada From: Benson, Joseph Sent: Tuesday, November 6, 2018 8:38 AM To: Swoboda, Gina, Romney, David Subject: RE: Mountain View Vote Center down I got another report of Fountain Hills Community Center not printing ballots as well. Not sure if we should keep a list of all these. From: Swobocla, Gina Sent: Tuesday, November 06, 2018 8:06 AM To: Romney, David Cc: Benson, Joseoh Subject: SDLE- Mountain View Vote Center clown Importance: High Caller who reported Cochise clown to Joe earlier called back It is Mountain View Vote Center that is down {Scottsdale} Only the Edge and 1 check in are working Line is over 30 minutes long now TV 8 Gina Swoboda Elections Lobbying Specialist Arizona Sem?etar}F of State Michele Reagan Of?ce: 602-364-3219 Email: gswobodai?aasosgo?e Public Disclosure Notice: This message and any messages in response to the sender of this message may be subject to a public records request. Fisher, Renada From: Sent: To: Subject: Petty. Janine Tuesday, November 6, 201B T136 AM 'Kristi Passareili RE: Dove of the desert untd Methodist church, Glendale Okav. Let me know when they are up and running please ?voter wanted a call back the From: Kristi Passarelli - RISCX Sent: Tuesday, November 06, 2-318 6:49 AM To: Petty, Janine Subject: RE: Dove of the desert untci Methodist church, Glendale Were looking into this Kristi Passarelli, Assistant Director - Election Services Please Forgive anv Tvpos Sent from my Windows Phone - rv From: Petty, Janine Sent: 6:4? AM To: Kristi Passarelli HISCX 7--.. gt -w amen-w?. Subject: Dove of the desert untd Methodist church, Glendale Good morning, 5 .. Have reports that this polling location is unable to printer ballots. Voter said that there were rougth 170 people waiting in line. She waited over V2 hour and had to leave. Janine M. Pettv Deputv State Election Director Arizona Secretary of State Michele Reagan Office: {502} 542-6209 ett azsos. ov E12503 gov a public records request. Public Disclosure Notice: This mesae and any messages in response to the sender of this message may be subject to Fisher, Renada I. From: Spencer, Eric Sent: Tuesday, November 6, 2018 12:11 PM To: 'Rey Valenzuela? Cc: 'Kristi Passarelli Petty, Janine; 'Adrian Fontes? Subject: SiteBook system upgrade Hi Rey, We?re getting bombarded with messages about a county-wide SiteBook system update that occurred in the last hour, Can you give us more information? We need to be able to explain to voters/press what happened, because lots of confusion at the moment. Thanks! Eric Eric H. Spencer State Election Director Arizona Secretary of State Michele Reagan Office: (602} 542-8683 esoenceriwazsosoov Public Disclosure Notice: This message and any messages in response to the sender of this message may be subject to a public records request. Fisher, Renada From: Kristi Passarelli - RISCX Sent Tuesday, November 6, 2018 11:54 AM To: Petty. Janine Subject: RE: Dove of the desert untd Methodist church, Glendale Foliow Up Flag: Foilow up Flag Status: Completed Hi Janine this location is a vote center there were issues this morning and again about 15 min ago but were are back up and running Kristi Passarelli, Assistant Director - Election Services Please Forgive any Typos Sent from my Windows Phone From: Petty, Janine Sent: 11/6f2018 11:49 AM To: Kristi Passarelli - RISCX Subject: RE: Dove of the desert untd Methodist church, Glendale Kristi, i assume this place is up and running again. Correct? From: Petty, Janine Sent: Tuesday, November 06, 2018 6:47 AM To: 'Kristi Passarelli - Subject: Dove of the desert untd Methodist church, Glendale Importance: High Good morning, Have reports that this poiling location is unable to printer ballots. Voter said that there were rougth 7'0 people waiting in iine. She waited over V2 hour and had to leave. Janine M. Petty Deputv State Election Director Arizona Secretary ofState Michele Reagan Office: (602] 5&2-5209 ett azsosmwa'vvwqu-am o?Ln?n?na ?mm Public Netiee: This message and any messages in response to the sender of this message may be subject to a public records request. Fisher, Renada I. From: Spencer, Eric Sent: Tuesday, November 6, 2018 1213? PM To: 'Rev Valenzuela Cc: Kristi Fassarelli Petty, Janine; Adrian Fontes RISCX Subject: RE: SiteBook system upgrade Thanks Rev, verv much appreciated. From: Rev Valenzuela RISCX Sent: Tuesday, November 6, 2018 12:21 PM To: Spencer, Eric . Subject: RE: SiteBook svstem upgrade Eric, there was a brief connection outage that lasted about 8 minutes but it was not due to the system update, It was a lock on our system that happed due to an internal job. It was stopped, cleared and system wen back up. Reynaldo Valenzuela Jr., CERA Director of Elections] Maricopa County Recorder Adrian Fontes 510 South End Avenue, Phoenix, Arizona SSDUB Phone: aoa-soa-soaa Fax: 502-505-5112 analcnewotza From: Spencer, Eric Cc: Kristi - RlSCi-t skoassarelli@riscmaricopagova; Pettv, Janine Cc: Kristi Passarelii - RISCX Pettv, Janine Adrian Fontes RISCX Cc: Kristi Passarelli - HISCX Petty, Janine cipettyQazsosgova; Adrian Fontes - RISCX cafontes@risc.maricopa.gov> Subject: RE: SiteBook system upgrade That was the assumption since we did an update but that update was not even at the same time that connectivity was lost. We actually know that it was a system lock that happened within our Provisional Review system that was then cleared. We have ACTIC here so I will let them know but may have been an earlier report. Thanks, Reynaldo Valenzuela Jr., CERA Director of Elections; lviaricopa County Recorder Adrian Fonles 511] South End Avenue, Phoenix, Arizona 85003 Phone: Fax 12 From: Spencer, Eric Subject: RE: SiteElook system upgrade BTW, the intel guys have this classified as a software update: (U511: DUO) Moricopa County Recorders (:Bf?ce General Electioos rt check-in was on hold until they determined what the tectmical issue as Source: Tip From: Rey Valenzuela - RISCX Sent: Tuesday, November 6, 2018 12:21 PM To: Spencer, Eric sespencerr?iazsosgoye Cc: Kristi Passarelli - RISCK Petty, ianine sipettyQazsosgoye; Adrian Fontes - (afontes@risc.maricopa.goy> Subject: RE: SiteBook system upgrade Eric, there was a brief connection outage that lasted about 8 minutes but it was not due to the system update, It was a lock on our system that happed due to an internal job. it was stopped, cleared and system wen back up. Reynaldo Valenzuela CERA Director of Elections Maricopa County Recorder Adrian Ponies 51:} South End Avenue, Phoenix, Arizona 35003 Phone: 1 Fax: 602-505-5112 From: Spencer, Eric Sent: Tuesday, November 5, 2018 12:11 PM To: Rey Valenzuela - RISCX Cc: Elections Subject: FW: Contact Form Submission - Turned awav from Polls told to reverse shirt EricfjanineXDavid, F?fl. Thanks. Tanner . .. .. Sent: Tuesday, November 6, 2018 2:39 PM To: Elections Subject: Contact Form Submission - Turned away from Polls told to reverse shirt Submitted on Tuesday, November 6, 2018 14:38 Submitted by user: Anonymous Submitted Contact Elections Name: Charlotte Plehn Email:? Subject: Turned away from Polls told to reverse shirt Message: I am furious. My personal liberty was infringed today as I was told to leave or put on a different shirt in order to vote. I was wearing an american ?ag shirt with the words ?Trump? on it in. This, is constitutionally allowed to be worn at the polls per supreme court. I was not advocating or anything simply trying to vote and get on with my day. The man at the ID check who?s name was Dale Gilullian (or something similar) told me to turn it or change. After which I informed him he was wrong and he admitted he was wrong. I am furious that someone with no understanding or care for rule is allowed to work at this ballot and decide who votes or doesn?t. This needs to be addressed. I will be anticipating a followup ., .. . .. .. .. .. .- . -- -- -- From: Fem; Janine To: "Kri i Subject: FW: PLACE ISSUE Date: Tuesday, November 6, 2018 9:28:19 AM Hi, Might want to send someone out to check for electioneering. Tn}: From: acousticlimax [mailtomaiwahoocom] Sent: Tuesday, November 6, To: Elections Subject: POLLING PLACE ISSUE Good Morning, voted this morning at the below location and there were two ladies outside, maybe 10 feet from the entrance hanging out political documents in support of a speci?c party. I thought that this wasn?t allowed? Either way I wanted to let someone know. Best regards, Scott Campbell JUAN POST 35? 2240 CHANDLER BLVD CHANDLER. AZ 85224 Sent from my T-Mobilc LTE Device From: 5% To: Cc: ?sdisaia Etc: seesaw Subject: RE: polling place Date: Tuesday, November 6; 2013 5:55: 15 PM Attachments: image001.jgg u- ham-owl. . Anv concerns can be reported via email. Piease respond with the following information: Polling location address Describe anv particular activities that took place What time were you at the coils? Ifthis pertains to vou specificale or you are requesting follow up, please provide the following: County of residence Fuil name Date of birth Residence address Phone number Arizona driver?s license number, last 4 of SSN, or voter ID number Thank you, Election Services Division Arizona Secretary of State Michele Reagan mm W. Washington at, ti? Floor Phoenix, AZ 35007 Of?ce: [602) 542-8683 Toll Free: E-mail: elections@azsos.gov TR Public Disclosure Notice: This message and any messages in resoonse to the sender of this message may be subject to a public records request. From: Rene Larson Sent: Tuesday, November 6, 2018 3:46 PM To: Elections Subject: Re: polling place Thank you. Who do I speak to about problems at a polling place? I was in Westbrook Village and it was a total mess. On Tue, Nov 6, 2018 at 2:24 PM Elections {We wrote: Hello; Voters can still vote a provisional =oailot based off of their new address todav, which will update their voter registration record; Be sure to bring a form of prooiC of address with vou. You can find additional forms of orootC of ID here: You can confirm your polling location information below: A2303 search tool: lv?oter Uiew search tool: gig Voters can also contact their coontv recorder?s office for further assistance finding their polling location todav. Thanks again for reaching out. Sincerelv, Election Services Division Arizona Secretary of State Michele Reagan Will] W. Washington 8L, Floor Phoenix1 AZ 8503? Of?ce: {502} 542?8533 Toll Free: E-mail: eiections@azsos.gov TR . Cid: - Pobiie Dieeloswe Notieei This message and any messages in respeose to the sender of this message may be to a public records request. From: Rene Larson {mailtoMngaime Sent: Tuesday, November :30 AM To: Elections Subject: polling place 3 Hello, i updated my voter registratioo 1with my new address back in July. I did not receive - my voter id card and am unable to locate my polling place online. Please advise whether i - should go to the polling place for my old address or my new one. Thanks EXHIBIT (Declaration of Allie McCann) DECLARATION l, Allie McCann, do upon oath declare as follows: 1. I am over 18 years of age and am competent to testify to the matters in this declaration. . I make this declaration based upon my own personal knowledge. . I reside and am registered to vote in Maricopa County, Arizona. . In approximately mid-October 2018, two individuals who did not identify themselves by name knocked on the door of my apartment residence at 1133 West Baseline Road in Tempe, Arizona. . The individuals handed me a ?ycr that appears to have been published by an organization called ?Arizona Wins? and asked whether I would be interested in helping them get out the vote for Democrat candidates in the upcoming election. When I asked what kind of work these individuals do, one of them stated that he rummages through dumpsters to ?nd discarded unvoted early ballots, which he then completes. I then indicated that I am a Republican, which prompted the individuals to abruptly end the conversation and leave my doorstep. I later observed the same individuals knocking on other doors in the apartment complex. . A true and correct copy of the ?yer provided to me by these individuals is attached to this declaration. I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct. Executed on this 11 day of November, 2018. ?ax Signature Allie McCann Printed Name I Arizona needs leaders who I will support our families. 5 Arizona necesita Iideres que respalden a nuestras families. I Election Day Tuesday, November 6 Dia de Elecciones Mates, 6 de Noviembre Paid 1m by Ali/(ma Wms. az?winsorg Hul an candidate candidate's hikes - Votedtouitiundingfor -EhdoasedbyArizona I teaches - Supports'h?umpsmimigmtim Suppoxtsapathto policiaandoppoeesapathto d?zenshipfor - qualaprotemonde 0W6 personasooncanc?donesde parapewmsomcondzames saludpreexisteniesconaa (es awnentosdesegums Whioporelcodedekmdos ?Apoyadaporlosmaestms de ~quahspolio?casde Iadudadam'apara opmeaimcaminohaciala dudadam'apamlosDREAMels DAVID GARCIA (D) DOUG DUCEY (R) - Educator endorsed by - Failed to address our Arizona teacher: and education crisis. leaving our support: fully funding schools nearly a billion Arizona public schools dollars short - Supports - Supported cutting funding (Medicaid) from (Medicaid) Opposes'minqah - Hasstoodwith'l?rumpand policies and praised his immigration supports policies - Educador respaldado 1 No hizo nada para an la la maestros de Arizona. are aids educative. dejan a el linanciamemo complete nuestras escuelas sin casi mil de [as escuelas publicas millones de d?lares de Arizona - Apoyo e! cone de londos para - Apoya la expansion de (Medicaid) (Medicaid) - Se uni? a [as fuems de - Se opone a [as politicos de Trump apoya sus politicos inmigracion de Trump de innu'gracio'n apoya a los